Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Posts Tagged ‘Russia’

By the Grace of God

WE, NICHOLAS THE SECOND, 

Emperor and Autocrat

Of All the Russias,

Tsar of Poland, Grand Duke of Finland,

etc., etc., etc.,

Declare to all Our loyal subjects:

 

Impossible as it seemed, but treacherously preparing from the very beginning of the war, Bulgaria has betrayed the Slav cause: The Bulgarian army has attacked Our faithful ally Serbia, [which is already] bleeding profusely in a struggle with a strong enemy.

 

Russia and Our allied Great Powers tried to warn Ferdinand of Coburg against this fatal step. The fullfillment of an age-old aspiration of the Bulgar people – union with Macedonia – has [already] been guaranteed to Bulgaria by a means more in accord with the interests of the Slav world.

 

But appeals by the Germans to secret ambitions and fratricidal emnity against the Serbs prevailed.

 

Bulgaria, whose [Orthodox] faith is the same as Ours, who so recently has been liberated from Turkish slavery by the brotherly love and the blood of the Russian people, openly took the side of the enemies of the Christian faith, the Slav world and of Russia.

 

The Russian people react with bitterness to the treachery of a Bulgaria which was so close to them until recently, and draw their swords against her with heavy hearts, leaving the fate of these traitors to the Slav world to God’s just retribution.

 

Given at the Tsar’s Headquarters the 5th day of October, in the year from the Nativity of Christ the 1,915th, and of Our reign the twenty-first.

 

On the true authority of His Imperial Majesty,

 

(signed)

 

NICHOLAS

 

Source: The World War I Document Archive

Read Full Post »

THE NEUTRALITY OF BELGIUM
1915
APPENDIX
A
TREATIES RELATIVE TO
THE NETHERLANDS AND BELGIUM
signed at London, April 19, 1839.

PRESENTED TO BOTH HOUSES OF PARLIAMENT BY
COMMAND OF HER MAJESTY, 1839

1. Treaty between Great Britain, Austria, France, Prussia and Russia, on the one part, and the Netherlands, on the other.

In the Name of the Most Holy and Indivisible Trinity.

Her Majesty the Queen of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, His Majesty the Emperor of Austria, King of Hungary and Bohemia, His Majesty the King of the French, His Majesty the King of Prussia, and His Majesty the Emperor of all the Russias, having taken into consideration their Treaty concluded with His Majesty the King of the Belgians, on the 15th of November 1831; and His Majesty the King of the Netherlands, Grand Duke of Luxembourg, being disposed to conclude a definite arrangement on the basis of the 24 Articles agreed upon by the Plenipotentiaries of Great Britain, Austria, France, Prussia, and Russia on the 14th of October, 1831; their said Majesties have named for their Plenipotentiaries, that is to say: * * *

Who, after having communicated to each other their Full Powers, found in good and due form, have agreed upon the following Articles:

ARTICLE I

His Majesty the King of the Netherlands, Grand Duke of Luxembourg, engages to cause to be immediately converted into a Treaty with His Majesty the King of the Belgians, the Articles annexed to the present Act, and agreed upon by common consent, under the auspices of the Courts of Great Britain, Austria, France, Prussia and Russia.

ARTICLE II

Her Majesty the Queen of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, His Majesty the Emperor of Austria, King of Hungary and Bohemia, His Majesty the King of the French, His Majesty the King of Prussia, and His Majesty the Emperor of all the Russias declare, that the Articles mentioned in the preceding Article, are considered as having the same force and validity as if they were textually inserted in the present Act, and that they are thus placed under the guarantee of their said Majesties.

ARTICLE III

The union which has existed between Holland and Belgium, in virtue of the Treaty of Vienna, of the 31st of May, 1815, is acknowledged by His Majesty the King of the Netherlands, Grand Duke of Luxembourg, to be dissolved.

ARTICLE IV

The present Treaty shall be ratified, and the ratifications shall be exchanged at London at the expiration of six weeks, or sooner, if possible. The exchange of these ratifications shall take place at the same time as that of the ratifications of the Treaty between Holland and Belgium.

In witness whereof, the respective Plenipotentiaries have signed the present Treaty, and have affixed thereto the seal of their Arms.

Done at London, the nineteenth day of April, in the year of Our Lord one thousand eight hundred and thirty-nine.

(L. S.) PALMERSTON,
(L. S.) SENFFT,
(L. S.) H. SEBASTIANI,
(L. S.) BÜLOW,
(L. S.) POZZO DI BORGO,
(L. S.) DEDEL.
Annex to the Treaty signed at London, on the 19th of April, 1839, between Great Britain, Austria, France, Prussia and Russia, on the one part, and the Netherlands, on the Other. [FOOTNOTE: Of the Twenty-Four Articles annexed to the treaty only such parts are reproduced here, as are of particular interest for the present study. A summary of the contents of all the Twenty-Four Articles is given in the footnote of page 48.

ARTICLE I

The Belgian territory shall be composed of the provinces:

South Brabant;
Liége;
Namur;
Hainault;
West Flanders;
East Flanders;
Antwerp; and
Limburg;
such as they formed part of the United Kingdom of the Netherlands constituted in 1815, with the exception of those districts of the province of Limburg which are designated in Article IV.

The Belgian territory shall, moreover, comprise that part of the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg which is specified in Article II.

ARTICLE II

In the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg, the limits of the Belgian territory shall be such as will be hereinafter described, viz.. . .

ARTICLE IV

In execution of that part of Article I which relates to the province of Limburg, and in consequence of the cessions of His Majesty the King of the Netherlands, Grand Duke of Luxembourg, makes in Article II, his said Majesty shall possess. . . .

ARTICLE VII

Belgium within the limits specified in Articles I, II and IV shall form an independent and perpetually neutral State. It shall be bound to observe such neutrality toward all other States.

(L. S.) PALMERSTON,
(L. S.) SENFFT,
(L. S.) H. SEBASTIANI,
(L. S.) BÜLOW,
(L. S.) POZZO DI BORGO,
(L. S.) DEDEL.
(A Treaty between Holland and Belgium comprising the 24 Articles above recited, together with the usual engagement for Peace and Friendship between the Parties, was also signed by the Plenipotentiaries of those two Powers on the 19th of April; and the ratifications were exchanged at the same time and place as those of the preceding Treaty.).

2. Treaty between Great Britain, Austria, France, Prussia and Russia, on the one part, and Belgium, on the other.

In the Name of the Most Holy and Indivisible Trinity.

Her Majesty the Queen of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, His Majesty the Emperor of Austria, King of Hungary and Bohemia, His Majesty the King of the French, His Majesty the King of Prussia, and His Majesty the Emperor of All the Russias, taking into consideration, as well as His Majesty the King of the Belgians, their Treaty concluded at London on the 15th of November, 1831, as well as the Treaties signed this day, between their Majesties the Queen of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, the Emperor of Austria, King of Hungary and Bohemia, the King of the French, the King of Prussia, and the Emperor of All the Russias, on the one part, and His Majesty the King of the Netherlands, Grand Duke of Luxembourg, on the other part, and between His Majesty the King of the Belgians and His said Majesty the King of the Netherlands, Grand Duke of Luxembourg, their said Majesties have named as their Plenipotentiaries, that is to say: * * *

Who, after having communicated to each other their Full Powers, found in good and due form, have agreed upon the following Articles:

ARTICLE I

Her Majesty the Queen of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, His Majesty the Emperor of Austria, King of Hungary and Bohemia, His Majesty the King of the French, His Majesty the King of Prussia, and His Majesty the Emperor of All the Russias, declare, that the Article hereunto annexed, and forming the tenor of the Treaty concluded this day between His Majesty the King of the Belgians and His Majesty the King of Netherlands, Grand Duke of Luxembourg, are considered as having the same force and validity as if they were textually inserted in the present Act, and that they are thus placed under the Guarantee of their said Majesties.

ARTICLE II

The Treaty of the 15th of November, 1831, between their Majesties the Queen of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, the Emperor of Austria, King of Hungary and Bohemia, the King of the French, the King of Prussia, and the Emperor of All the Russias, and His Majesty the King of the Belgians, is declared not to be obligatory upon the High Contracting Parties.

ARTICLE III

The present treaty shall be ratified, and the Ratifications shall be exchanged at London at the expiration of six weeks, or sooner if possible. This exchange shall take place the same time as that of the Ratifications of the Treaty between Belgium and Holland.

In witness whereof, the respective Plenipotentiaries have signed the present Treaty, and have affixed thereto the Seal of their Arms.

Done at London, the 19th day of April, in the year of Our Lord, 1839.

(L. S.) PALMERSTON,
(L. S.) SENFFT,
(L. S.) H. SEBASTIANI,
(L. S.) BÜLOW,
(L. S.) POZZO DI BORGO,
(L. S.) SYLVAIN VAN DE WEYER.
* * *

Annex to the Treaty signed at London on the 19th of April, 1839, between Great Britain, Austria, France, Prussia and Russia, on the one part, and Belgium, on the other part.

(This annex, signed by the same Plenipotentiaries who signed the preceding Treaty, is word for word the same as the Annex to the Treaty between the Five Powers and the King of the Netherlands.)

3. Act of accession on the part of the Germanic Confederation to the territorial Arrangements concerning the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg contained in the first seven Articles of the Annex to the two preceding Treaties.

The Plenipotentiaries of the Courts of Great Britain, Austria, Belgium, France, the Netherlands, Prussia and Russia, having this day, signed the Treaties concluded between the five Courts and His Majesty the King of the Netherlands, Grand Duke of Luxembourg, between their Majesties the King of the Belgians and the King of the Netherlands, Grand Duke of Luxembourg, and between the five Courts and His Majesty the King of the Belgians, the Plenipotentiaries have deemed it expedient that the Plenipotentiaries of Austria and Prussia, invested with Full Powers from the Diet of the Germanic Confederation, should be invited to accede in the name of the said Confederation, to the arrangements concerning the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg, which are contained in the Treaties above mentioned.

In consequence, the Plenipotentiaries of Austria and Prussia, representing the Diet in virtue of the said Full Powers, declare that the Germanic Confederation formally accedes to the territorial arrangements concerning the Grand Duchy of Luxembourg, which are contained in Articles I, II, III, IV, V, VI and VII, of the Annex to the Treaties this day concluded between the five Courts and His Majesty the King of the Netherlands, Grand Duke of Luxembourg, and between the five Courts and His Majesty the King of the Belgians, as well as in the corresponding Articles of the Treaty signed at the same time between His Majesty the King of the Belgians and His Majesty the King of the Netherlands, Grand Duke of Luxembourg. And they take towards the Courts of Great Britain, Austria, Belgium, France, the Netherlands, Prussia and Russia, in the name of the Germanic Confederation, the engagement that the Confederation will entirely conform to the stipulations contained in the said Articles, which are hereinafter inserted word for word, so far as they concern the Germanic Confederation .

[Here follow the first seven Articles of the Annex to the two preceding Treaties.]

The Plenipotentiaries of Great Britain, Belgium, France, the Netherlands, Prussia and Russia, in virtue of their Full Powers, formally accept, in the name of their respective Courts, the said Accession on the part of the Germanic Confederation.

The present Act of Accession shall be ratified by the Courts of Great Britain, Austria, Belgium, France, the Netherlands, Prussia and Russia, and also by the Germanic Confederation, by means of a Decree of the Diet, of which the requisite number of copies shall be prepared. And the respective Acts of Ratification shall be exchanged at London at the expiration of six weeks from this date, or sooner if possible, and at the same time as the exchange of the Ratifications of the three Treaties above mentioned.

In witness whereof the respective Plenipotentiaries have signed the present Act of Accession, and have affixed thereto the Seal of their Arms.

Done at London, the 19th day of April, in the year of our Lord, 1839.

(L. S.) PALMERSTON,
(L. S.) SENFFT,
(L. S.) SYLVAIN VAN DE WEYER,
(L. S.) H. SEBASTIANI,
(L. S.) DEDEL,
(L. S.) BÜLOW.
(L. S.) POZZO DI BORGO, (L. S.) SENFFT,
(L. S.) BÜLOW

——————————————————————————–

APPENDIX
B

TREATY
BETWEEN HER MAJESTY
AND THE KING OF PRUSSIA
RELATIVE TO
THE INDEPENDENCE AND NEUTRALITY
OF BELGIUM

Signed at London, August 9, 1870

PRESENTED TO BOTH HOUSES OF PARLIAMENT BY
COMMAND OF HER MAJESTY, 1871

(Ratifications exchanged at London, August 26, 1870)

Her Majesty the Queen of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, and His Majesty the King of Prussia, being desirous at the present time of recording in a solemn Act their fixed determination to maintain the independence and neutrality of Belgium, as provided in Article VII of the Treaty signed at London on the 19th of April, 1839, between Belgium and the Netherlands, which Article was declared by the Quintuple Treaty of 1839 to be considered as having the same force and value as if textually inserted in the said Quintuple Treaty, their said Majesties have determined to conclude between themselves a separate Treaty, which, without impairing or invalidating the conditions of the said Quintuple Treaty, shall be subsidiary and accessory to it; and they have accordingly named as their Plenipotentiaries for that purpose, that is to say. * * *

Who, after having communicated to each other their respective full powers, found in good and due form, have agreed upon and concluded the following Articles:

ARTICLE I

His Majesty the King of Prussia having declared that, notwithstanding the hostilities in which the North German Confederation is engaged with France, it is his fixed determination to respect the neutrality of Belgium, so long as the same shall be respected by France, Her Majesty the Queen of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland on her part declares that, if during the said hostilities the armies of France should violate that neutrality, she will be prepared to co-operate with His Prussian Majesty for the defense of the same in such manner as may be mutually agreed upon, employing for that purpose her naval and military forces to insure its observance, and to maintain, in conjunction with His Prussian Majesty, then and thereafter, the independence and neutrality of Belgium.

It is clearly understood that Her Majesty the Queen of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland does not engage herself by this Treaty to take part in any of the general operations of the war now carried on between the North German Confederation and France, beyond the limits of Belgium, as defined in the Treaty between Belgium and the Netherlands of April 19, 1839.

ARTICLE II

His Majesty the King of Prussia agrees on his part, in the event provided for in the foregoing Article, to co-operate with Her Majesty the Queen of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, employing his naval and military forces for the purpose aforesaid; and, the case arising, to concert with Her Majesty the measures which shall be taken, separately or in common, to secure the neutrality and independence of Belgium.

ARTICLE III

This Treaty shall be binding on the High Contracting Parties during the continuance of the present war between the North German Confederation and France, and for twelve months after the ratification of any Treaty of Peace concluded between those Parties; and on the expiration of that time the independence and neutrality of Belgium will, so far as the High Contracting Parties are respectively concerned, continue to rest as heretofore on Article I of the Quintuple Treaty of the 19th of April, 1839.

ARTICLE IV

The present Treaty shall be ratified, and the ratifications shall be exchanged at London as soon as possible.

In witness wherof the respective Plenipotentiaries have signed the same, and have affixed thereto the seal of their arms.

Done at London, the 9th day of August, in the year of our Lord 1870.

(L. S.) GRANVILLE,
(L. S.) BERNSTORFF.

——————————————————————————–

APPENDIX
C

TREATY
BETWEEN HER MAJESTY
AND THE EMPEROR OF THE FRENCH
RELATIVE TO
THE INDEPENDENCE AND NEUTRALITY
OF BELGIUM

Signed at London, August 11, 1870

PRESENTED TO BOTH HOUSES OF PARLIAMENT BY
COMMAND OF HER MAJESTY, 1871

(Ratifications exchanged at London, August 26, 1870)

Her Majesty the Queen of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, and His Majesty the Emperor of the French, being desirous at the present time of recording in a solemn Act their fixed determination to maintain the independence and neutrality of Belgium, as provided by Article VII of the Treaty signed at London on the 19th of April, 1839, between Belgium and the Netherlands, which Article was declared by the Quintuple Treaty of 1839 to be considered as having the same force and value as if textually in the said Quintuple Treaty, their said Majesties have determined to conclude between themselves a separate Treaty, which, without impairing or invalidating the conditions of the said Quintuple Treaty, shall be subsidiary and accessory to it; and they have accordingly named as their Plenipotentiaries for the purpose, that is to say: * * *

Who, after having communicated to each other their respective full powers, found in good and due form, have agreed upon and concluded the following Articles:

ARTICLE I

His Majesty the Emperor of the French having declared that, notwithstanding the hostilities in which France is now engaged with the North German Confederation and its Allies, it is his fixed determination to respect the neutrality of Belgium, so long as the same shall be respected by the North German Confederation and its Allies, Her Majesty the Queen of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland on her part declares that, if during the said hostilities the armies of the North German Confederation and its Allies should violate that neutrality, she will be prepared to co-operate with His Imperial Majesty for the defense of the same in such manner as may be mutually ‘agreed upon, employing for that purpose her naval and military forces to insure its observance, and to maintain, in conjunction with His Imperial Majesty, then and thereafter, the independence and neutrality of Belgium.

It is clearly understood that Her Majesty the Queen of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland does not engage herself by this Treaty to take part in any of the general operations of the war now carried on between France and the North German Confederation and its Allies, beyond the limits of Belgium, as defined in the Treaty between Belgium and the Netherlands of April 19, 1839.

ARTICLE II

His Majesty the Emperor of the French agrees on his part, in the event provided for in the foregoing Article, to co-operate with Her Majesty the Queen of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, employing his naval and military forces for the purpose aforesaid; and, the case arising, to concert with Her Majesty the measures which shall be taken, separately or in common, to secure the neutrality and independence of Belgium.

ARTICLE III

This Treaty shall be binding on the High Contracting Parties during the continuance of the present war between France and the North German Confederation and its Allies, and for twelve months after the ratification of any Treaty of Peace concluded between those Parties; and on the expiration of that time the independence and neutrality Of Belgium will, so far as the High Contracting Parties are respectively concerned, continue to rest, as heretofore, on Article I of the Quintuple Treaty of the 19th of April, 1839.

ARTICLE IV

The present Treaty shall be ratified, and the ratifications shall be exchanged at London as soon as possible.

In witness whereof the respect[ive] Plenipotentiaries have signed the same, and have affixed thereto the seal of their arms.

Done at London, the 11th day of August, in the year of our Lord, 1870.

(L. S.) GRANVILLE,
(L. S.) LA VALETTE.

——————————————————————————–

APPENDIX
D

THE FRENCH PLAN OF CAMPAIGN(From the North German Gazette of September 30, 1914)

The plans for the general French advance against the German forces were found among the papers of a French officer, captured near Verdun. They are as follows:

First Army, consisting of the I, II, III and X army-corps, concentrates at Maubeuge;

Second Army, consisting of the IX, XI, IV and. VI army-corps,. concentrates at Verdun;

Third Army, consisting of the XX, V. and VIII army-corps, concentrates at Toul;

Fourth Army, consisting of the XIII, XII, XVII and XVIII army-corps, concentrates at Epinal;

Fifth Army, consisting of the VII, XIV, XV and XVI army-corps, concentrates at Belfort.

The First Army unites with the English and Belgian forces, and. after marching through Belgium, occupies Cologne and Coblenz, and opposes the German forces advancing from Northern Germany.

The Second Army has to occupy Metz, and, after having accomplished this, turns towards Saarlouis and Coblenz, where it will join with the First Army.

The Third Army penetrates Lorraine, occupies the northern part of the Vosges, and will then take up a position before Strassburg.

The Fourth Army occupies the remainder of the Vosges and afterwards follows the advance of the other Armies as reserve reinforcement.

The Fifth Army will storm Altkirch and Muehlhausen, and then remove towards Strassburg, which is to be taken, after which it joins the Third Army.

After which there will remain only three armies, that is to say:

Army A in Coblenz,
Army C in Strassburg,
Army D in reserve.

——————————————————————————–

APPENDIX
E

EXTRACT FROM THE SPEECH OF THE
IMPERIAL CHANCELLOR,
DR. VON BETHMANN HOLLWEG

GIVEN IN THE REICHSTAG, ON AUGUST 4, 1914

(Translated from the Supplement to the North German Gazette of August 9, 1914)

“Gentlemen: We are, at present, in a state of legitimate defense and necessity knows no law! [FOOTNOTE: This translation does not render exactly the German original “Wir sind jetzt in Notwehr; und Not kennt kein Gebot!” but the English language hardly suggests any other rendering.] Our troops have occupied Luxembourg; perhaps they have entered already Belgian territory. Gentlemen, this is contrary to the rules of international law. It is true that the French Government has declared at Brussels that it would respect Belgium’s neutrality as long as the adversary would respect it. However, we knew that France was ready for an invasion. France could afford to wait, but we could not! A French invasion at our flank, at the Lower Rhine, could have become fatal to us. Thus, we were forced to disregard the justified protests of the Governments of Luxembourg and Belgium. The wrong—I speak openly—the wrong which thereby we commit, we shall try to make good as soon as our military aim is attained. Whoever is threatened as we are, is not allowed to have any other consideration beyond that how he will hack his way through!”

——————————————————————————–

APPENDIX
F

FAC-SIMILE REPRODUCTIONS OF THE
“BRUSSELS DOCUMENTS”

a. The original cover, in which the report of General Ducarne was found.

b.The report of General Ducarne to the Belgian Minister of War, concerning his military conversations with the British Lieutenant-Colonel Barnardiston.

c. The Minutes of the military conversations between General Jungbluth and the British Lieutenant-Colonel Bridges.

page one,

page two,

page three,

page four

——————————————————————————–
APPENDIX

G

ENGLAND AND BELGIUM

NEW DOCUMENTS CONCERNING ENGLAND’S BREACH OF NEUTRALITY

(From the North German Gazette of December 2, 1914)

Further proofs have been found that England, in cooperation with Belgium, had prepared the war against Germany already during peace time to the utmost, not only in a diplomatic but also in a military way. Recently, our troops seized some secret military guide-books about Belgium, edited by the British General Army Staff, entitled: “Belgium, Road and River Reports, prepared by the General Staff, War Office.”

We are in possession of four volumes of this handbook, of which volume I was printed in 1912, volume 2 in 1913, volume 3 (in two parts) and volume 4 in 1914.

They show the following imprint: “Confidential. This book is the property of the British Government and is to be used for the personal information of . . . . . . . who himself is responsible for the safe keeping of the book. The contents are to be revealed to authorized persons only.”

The handbook contains evidences of military investigations in the minutest and most exact descriptions of the territory. The introduction reads as follows: “These reports can give only the condition of the roads at the time in which they were investigated. It will always be advisable to investigate them again before they are used, in order to make sure that they are not closed on account of repairs, pipe laying,” etc.

Thus, for instance, in volume 1, page 130 and following, the great highroad, Nieuport-Dixmude-Ypres-Menin-Tourcoing-Tournai, is described and accompanied by maps, with special regard to quality of the roads, the surrounding country, tactic considerations, observation posts and water conditions. In this discussion all the villages along the highroad are enumerated and described. Thus we find their exact distance from one another, detailed descriptions of the road net, with reference to elevations, bridges, crossings, telephone and telegraph stations, railway stations, including length of platforms and landing places; branch lines, oil tanks, etc. It is always mentioned whether the population speaks partly or altogether French.

As an illustration we may cite the tactical remarks about Dixmude on page 151:

It will be difficult to take Dixmude from the north or from the south. The best position for defense against attacks from the south would be the railway embankment in the west as far as the street, to the east a number of small bills. As far as 1,500 yards west of the street the field is favorable for firing; farther to the east the view is obstructed by trees. Two battalions would be sufficient for occupation. The hostile artillery probably would be situated near Hoogmolen and Vertkant; otherwise there is nothing of tactical importance, nor is there anything which might retard marching. Point of observation, the mill of Reencheek permitting of a free panoramic view; also the Koelberg, seven and one-half miles distant from Ypres, with outlook toward the east and south.
It may be mentioned that the church towers are usually mentioned as good observation points.

In a similar detailed manner the entire course of the Scheldt, with all tributaries, villages, landings, opportunities for crossing, widths and depths, bridges, supply of boats, etc., is described.

Thus the handbooks form an excellent guide for the army leader, the officer of the general staff and for officers second in command. To the book are added:

First—A schedule containing information about communities and villages for purposes of billeting; furthermore, instructions regarding transportation and all other items which may be needed by the local commander.

Second—A number of important hints to aviators for that part of Belgium which is situated south of the line Charleroi-Namur-Liége as well as for the surroundings of Brussels.

This very carefully and comprehensively drawn memorandum is supplemented by a map showing the landing places. It bears the inscription “Secret” and is dated July, 1914.

These military geographical handbooks cannot be supposed to have been written shortly before or during the war. That would, aside from putting them in print, have been impossible. The material for the work has, on the contrary, as may be seen from remarks in the different parts, been collected since 1909. The first volume was printed in 1912.

The manuals therefore prove a minute preparation carried on during the last five years for an English campaign in neutral Belgium. They are nothing else but secret regulations of military service for an English army fighting in Belgium. The English general staff therefore since long time prepared themselves for this event and foresaw the same so surely that they undertook the painstaking work of compiling these military handbooks.

Without ready and far-reaching assistance on the part of the Belgian government and military authorities such at work would not have been possible. Those strategical and tactical reports, going into the minutest details, as mentioned above, or such exact data concerning railroads and transportation service, rolling stock, locks, and bridges, could not have been obtained in any other way. The schedules about the billeting capacity, which deal with Belgium as if it were English territory, could only be derived from the Belgian government. Without doubt official Belgium material has been used. It is made suitable for English purposes or at many places simply translated into English!

Very extensively, indeed, England and Belgium had prepared themselves together during times of peace for military co-operation. Belgium in political as well as in military matters was nothing but a vassal state of England. The indignation which England today is putting tip before the world because of Germany’s so-called breach of neutrality is made altogether meaningless and unjust by those documents.

When on account of our operations at the coast the English and French press remarked sneeringly that we were not sufficiently instructed about the dangers of the inundation district in the so-called “Polderland” they were right in so far as before the beginning of the war we did not know Belgian territorial conditions any better than may be learned from sources obtainable in the book market.

The English reconnoitering reports and the excellent maps, therefore, were very valuable booty for us. We were able to make immediate use of this remarkable material and thus could fight England with her own weapons. That should be the best indication of the importance of our enemies’ painstaking labor.

——————————————————————————–

APPENDIX
H

HOW ENGLAND PLAYED WITH BELGIAN
NEUTRALITY

(From the North German Gazette of December 15, 194)

New and convincing evidence with reference to the Anglo-Belgian complicity has been found. Some time ago there was detained in Brussels the British Secretary of Legation, Grant-Watson, who had remained in the British Legation after the office had been transferred to Antwerp and later on to Havre. This Grant-Watson has been caught in the act of disposing of a number of documents which he at the time of his detention had taken with him from the Legation.

An investigation of these documents showed that they were of the most intimate kind, containing exact information, of the years 1913 and 1914, about the Belgian mobilization plans and about the defense of Antwerp. Among them were also found circular decrees directed to the higher Belgian commands, with fac-simile signatures of the Belgian Minister of War and the Belgian General Staff. Furthermore, a report of a session of the “commission for the provisions base at Antwerp” of May 27, 1913, was found.

The fact that these documents had been at the British Legation sufficiently proves that the Belgian Government in military matters had no secrets from the British Government and that those two governments had a continuous and most intimate understanding in military matters.

Of especial interest is also a handwritten note which was found with the papers and for the destruction of which the British Secretary was very anxious. It was of the following tenor:

RENSEIGNEMENTS
(1) Les officiers français ont reçu ordre de rejoindre dès le 27, après-midi. (2) Le même jour le chef de Gare de Feignies a reçu ordre de concentrer vers Maubeuge tous les wagons fermés disponibles en vue de transport de troupes. Communiqué par la Brigade de gendarmerie de Frameries.
INFORMATION
(1) The French officers have received order to rejoin on the 27th in the afternoon. (2) The same day the station master at Feignies has received order to concentrate toward Maubeuge all available closed railway cars in view of transport of troops. Communicated by the brigade de gendarmerie at Frameries.
It is of interest to note that Feignies is a railway station on the Maubeuge-Mons line, about three kilometers from the Franco-Belgian boundary.

From this note we learn that France as early as July 27 had taken her first mobilization measures and that the English Legation received notice of this fact immediately from the Belgian Government.

If there were any need for further proof of the relations which existed between England and Belgium the material found would be a valuable supplement in that respect.

It shows again that Belgium had abandoned her neutrality in favor of the entente and that she had become an active member of that coalition, which was formed for the purpose of fighting Germany. For England, however, Belgian neutrality meant nothing more than a “scrap of paper,” which she appealed to if it were advantageous to her interests and which she ignored if this were more to her purposes. It is plain that the English Government used the violation of Belgian neutrality by Germany as a pretext only in order to make the world and the English people believe that her cause for the war was a just one.

——————————————————————————–

APPENDIX
I

EXTRACT FROM THE SPEECH OF THE
IMPERIAL CHANCELLOR

MADE IN THE GERMAN REICHSTAG, ON DECEMBER 2, 1914.

(From the North German Gazette of Dec. 3, 1914)

Belgium’s neutrality which England pretended to be shielding is nothing but a mask.

On August 2, at 7 P. m., we informed Brussels that France’s plan of campaign, known to us, compelled us, for reasons of self-preservation, to march through Belgium. But the same afternoon already, that is to say before anything of that démarche was known and could be known at London, the British Government had pledged its support to France, pledged it unconditionally in case the German fleet attacked the French coast. Not one word was then said of Belgium’s neutrality. This fact is established by the declaration of Sir Edward Grey in the House of Commons on August 3, which, owing to the difficulties in the transmission of telegrams prevailing at that time, was not known to me in full on August 4—and it is confirmed by the Blue Book, issued by the British Government.

How then can England pretend that she drew the sword because we violated Belgium’s neutrality?

How could British statesmen, who accurately knew the past, talk of Belgian neutrality at all?

When on August 4, 1 referred to the wrong we were doing in marching through Belgium it was not yet known for certain whether in the hour of affliction the Brussels Government would not decide after all to spare the country and to retire to Antwerp under protest. Remembering that, after the occupation of Liége, I addressed renewed offers in that sense to the Belgian Government, at the request of our Army Administration, you will understand that, on August 4, for military reasons, the possibility for such a development had to be kept open under all circumstances.

Even then the guilt of the Belgian Government was apparent from many a sign. I had not yet any positive documentary proofs thereof at my disposal, but the British statesmen were perfectly familiar with those proofs.

The documents which, in the meantime, have been found at Brussels, and which have been given publicity by me, prove and establish in what way and to what degree Belgium had surrendered her neutrality to England.

The whole world is now acquainted with two outstanding facts—first, when, in the night from the 3d to the 4th of August, our troops entered Belgium, they were not on neutral soil, but on the soil of a state that had long abandoned its neutrality; second, England has declared war on us, not for the sake of Belgium’s neutrality, which she herself had helped to undermine, but because she believed that, with the co-operation of two great military Powers of the Continent, she could overcome and master us.

Ever since August 2, when she promised armed support to France, England was no longer neutral but actually in a state of war with us. Her pointing at our violation of Belgium’s neutrality, when she declared war on us on August 4, was nothing but a spectacular trick, intended to deceive the English people and foreign neutral countries about her true war motives.

The war plans which England and Belgium had worked out together to the minutest details now being unveiled, the policy of British statesmen is branded in world history, for all time to come!

——————————————————————————–

APPENDIX
K

AFFIDAVITS CONCERNING THE PRESENCE OF FRENCH TROOPS ON
BELGIAN SOIL PRIOR TO THE
GERMAN INVASION

[FOOTNOTE: Taken from Dr. Richard Grasshof’s Belgiens Schuld, where the author expressly states that he has selected these sworn testimonials from a large number of depositions made before the German authorities, concerning this matter.]

1.

Julian Requet—wrongly called Louis Bellard—sub-corporal in the 8th regiment of Hussars in the French Army, states:

“Together with two other hussars I was out on patrol. While these two probably fell, I, losing my horse, succeeded in getting away, hurried to the next village, where I changed my clothes in a house. Thus I was captured alone and can give no information as to the whereabouts of other comrades.

“Upon being asked, the aforementioned stated that his regiment was mobilized on July 30, 1914. The regiment left its garrison on July 31st and was detrained at midnight in Hirson. In the same night the regiment rode to Laneuville-aux-Tourneurs, where it remained two days. From there it then proceeded to Donchery, and on August 2nd from there to Bouillon. At Bouillon they united with the dragoon regiments 23 and 27, also with the 3d regiment of Hussars. These regiments are said to have crossed the frontier simultaneously.”

2.

Being duly sworn, Gaston Omar Eugene Sailly, in civil life hairdresser at St. Omer, since March, 1913, active soldier in the 21st French regiment of dragoons, states:

“The 21st French regiment of dragoons was transported by rail from Noyon, its garrison, to Hirson in one day, and on the same day the regiment took quarters in villages in the vicinity of Hirson; the second squadron, to which I belong, at Bossus. The second squadron remained several days at Bossus. On the evening of the latter day, about between six and seven o’clock, I was in Bossus in the place of a hairdresser, who sold tobacco and had a taproom. In the room in which I sat during this time a bell rang. The hairdresser stepped to the telephone; someone spoke to him. When he hung up the receiver he called out to me that he had received per telephone, just now, the news that just then in France the mobilization had been ordered. I know positively that the second squadron left Bossus early the next morning and soon thereafter joined the other squadrons. The regiment made a day’s march to the Belgian city Bouillon, near which the Belgian-French border was crossed. Simultaneously with the 21st also the 5th French regiment of dragoons, and also one or several French regiments of cuirassiers which I saw, but the number of which I do not know, together with artillery, the regimental number of which I also do not know, crossed the Franco-Belgian frontier in the direction of Bouillon. Bouillon, therefore, was reached on the same day on the morning of which the 21st regiment of dragoons had ridden out of Bossus and the villages in the vicinity. The 21st regiment of dragoons rode through Bouillon and spent the night in the immediate vicinity, the second squadron in a small church village, a few kilometers distant. On the next morning the 21st and 5th regiments of dragoons, forming a brigade, rode northward deeper into Belgium. There also were French cavalry regiments, especially cuirassiers and artillery, which I am not able to specify more minutely.”

3.

Gustave Cochard, from Rimogne, since the fall of 1913 active soldier in the 28th French regiment of dragoons, states under oath:

“On July 31, 1914, at 10 a. m., the two regiments of dragoons, the 28th and the 30th, garrisoned at Sedan, proceeded into the field. At first they rode together in France, along the State Street to Mouzon, where they arrived about noon. In the hours of the afternoon, about between 2 and 2:30, there arrived from a different direction, in the village of Mouzon, four cannon of the 40th French artillery regiment, garrisoned in Meziers-Charleville, together. with munition wagons, whereupon the two regiments of dragoons, the 28th in the lead, then the guns, and following them the 30th regiment of dragoons, started out, at first again in the direction towards Sedan.

“The dragoons rode four abreast, without guards; the 3d troop of the 3d squadron, to which I belonged, rode furthest in advance. I rode in the fourth file, and therefore was able to see everything that transpired at the head of the detachment.

“When the detachment had arrived near the French village of Bazeilles, on the State highroad Mouzon-Sedan, it suddenly turned towards the North and proceeded via La Chapelle to the Belgian frontier. The Belgian-French frontier was crossed on July 31, 1914, at about 9 o’clock in the evening, or a few quarters of an hour thereafter, on the highroad La Chapelle-Bouillon, by the two French regiments of dragoons and the French battery. Lieutenant Malespieux, commanding my troop, rode at the head. On the spot where the highroad La Chapelle-Bouillon crosses the French border, a Belgian brigadier and four gendarmes on horse, who as such were without difficulty recognizable by their uniforms, reported to him. The brigadier and the four gendarmes were waiting already at this point when we arrived there. These five members of the gendarmerie then proceeded at the head and thus led the detachment to the city of Bouillon, located three miles from the French border on Belgian soil. A short distance before Bouillon, the 30th regiment of dragoons, separated from the detachment in order to take quarters on Belgian territory, so that only the 28th regiment of dragoons and the battery entered Bouillon on July 31, 1914, about 10 o’clock in the evening. The head of the regiment stopped in the city before the office of the burgomaster. Captain Lainez, commanding my squadron, entered the building. After some time—it may have been an hour—a municipal functionary brought from the burgomaster’s office the quarter notices for the 28th regiment of dragoons and the battery, which was still standing in the street before the burgomaster’s office. I then proceeded with about thirty other dragoons to my quarters, a barn within the city.

“The night from July 31, 194, to August 1, 1914, therefore was spent by the 28th French regiment of dragoons and the French battery in the Belgian city of Bouillon, while the 30th regiment of dragoons also was lying in quarters on Belgian soil nearby. The reception on the part of the Belgian population was in no way antagonistic, but on the contrary, very friendly.

“After the morning inspection, Lieutenant Malespieux, together with twenty-five dragoons, I among them, left, as a patrol, in an easterly direction, before six o’clock in the morning, alternately walking the horses, then in a trot, we proceeded along the highroad from Bouillon to Arlon, towards the east, constantly on Belgian soil. The ride of this patrol led from Bouillon on this road through the Belgian municipalities: St. Cécile, Chassepierre, Florenville, Pin, Vincent, Belle Fontaine, St. Marie to St. Laurent, which lies toward Arlon and is more than forty kilometers distant from Bouillon. Therefore, on August 1, 1914, more than forty kilometers were covered in an easterly direction, exclusively on Belgian soil. The officers’ patrol, twenty-five men, arrived at St. Laurent after nine o’clock in the evening. Lieutenant Malespieux rode according to the map; on the way he did not send out any smaller patrols. About an hour later, the entire regiment of the 28th dragoons and the French battery arrived in St. Laurent The men stated that they had followed on the same road along which the patrol had proceeded. They had ridden together with the 30th regiment of dragoons and the French battery up to within a short distance of St. Laurent, in the neighborhood of which the 30th regiment of dragoons separated from the rest of the column and proceeded to a Belgian village situated a few kilometers distant from St. Laurent. The two regiments of dragoons and the battery therefore proceeded on August 1, 1914, more than forty kilometers, advancing into Belgian territory.

“When I, on August 1st, together with the officers’ patrol of twenty-five men, riding along the State highroad Bouillon-Arlon, this patrol, in the section Bouillon-Florenville, passed a country road which crosses the highroad Bouillon-Florenville and the open field. According to my recollection, about 500 meters behind this crossing, there is a village through which we rode, situated about three kilometers from Florenville. To the right of the highroad, three French cavalry regiments were standing as we were passing this crossing point of the two roads. The men called out to us that they were the Third and Sixth Cuirassiers, and the French 4th regiment of hussars. As we passed, the three French cavalry regiments set also in motion and followed the patrol for several hours. A considerable number of kilometers, it may have been ten, after riding through Florenville, the three cavalry regiments, which we had met in probably the earlier hours of the afternoon of August 1, 1914, at the road-crossing on Belgian soil, and which had followed us for several hours, turned to the left, and therefore entered still more deeply into Belgium.

“Any mistake concerning the fact that the two regiments of dragoons and the battery crossed the Belgian frontier on the evening of July 31, 1914, and remained at least the entire following week uninterruptedly on Belgian territory, is excluded if only for the following reason:

“On about July 20, 1914, 1 had entered a request for a fourteen days’ furlough to my home, Rimonge, and this had been granted and was to begin on August 1, 1914. Even in the evening of July 30, 1914, nothing was known of the mobilization, and I was of the opinion that on August 1, 1914, 1 would be able to go home for a fortnight. The physical inspection, to which every French soldier must submit before he goes on furlough, had been ordered for me the morning of July 31, 1914. Instead of meeting the physician on July 31, 1914, and going on furlough on August 1, I was obliged on July 31, 194, to suddenly proceed to the field. That has impressed itself on my memory indelibly. I repeat that every error as to my mentioning of time and dates is out of the question.”

——————————————————————————–

APPENDIX
L

THE ENGLISH PRESS OF 1887 ON
BELGIUM’S NEUTRALITY

1

THE BETRAYAL OF BELGIUM
WHAT THE ENGLISH TORIES ONCE SAID

(The Labour Leader, February 4, 1915)

In the records of political hypocrisy we doubt if there is anything more complete or more dishonest than that of the British Tory Party, regarding Belgium, and we give today a proof which must make honest men stand aghast and fill decent citizens with disgust. On February 4, 1887, The Standard published a letter and leading article, both of which we reproduce below. At that time The Standard was the official organ of the Tory Government; its editor was a bosom friend of Lord Salisbury, and every pronouncement of this character which appeared in it was to all intents and purposes a Government statement. It will be noted that in the leading article “Diplomaticus” is described as being a person of high authority, and his letter has been regarded as official by writers on diplomatic history like M. Milovanovitch. (Traités de Garantie au XIX Siècle, Paris (1888), p. 465).

Standard, Friday, February 4, 1887
To the Editor of The Standard:
Sir:—Military experts are of the opinion that France has spent so much money, and spent it so well during the last sixteen years in providing herself with a fresh military frontier, that a direct advance by the German armies into France, past the new fortresses and forts that have been erected and linked together, would be, even if possible, a very hazardous undertaking.

But if Germany was, or considered itself to be, provoked into a struggle of life and death with France would Prince Bismarck, with the mighty forces he can set in motion, consent to be baffled by the artificial obstacles to which I have alluded, so long as there existed a natural and undefended road by which he could escape from his embarrassment?

Such a road or way out does exist. It lies on Belgian territory. But the neutrality of Belgium is protected by European guarantee and England is one of the guarantors.

In 1870 Earl Granville, then at the head of the English Foreign Office, alive to this danger, promptly and wisely bound England to side with France if Prussia violated Belgian territory and with Prussia if France did so.

Would Lord Salisbury act prudently to take upon himself a similar engagement in the event of a fresh conflict between these two countries? It is for Englishmen to answer the question. But it seems to me, as one not indifferent to the interests and greatness of England, that such a course at the present moment would be unwise to the last degree. However much England might regret the invasion of Belgian territory by either party to the struggle, she could not take part with France against Germany (even if Germany were to seek to turn the French flank by putting its armies through the Belgian Ardennes) without utterly vitiating and destroying the main purpose of English policy all over the world.

But, it will be asked, must not England honor its signature and be faithful to its public pledges? I reply that your Foreign Minister ought to be equal to the task of meeting this objection without committing England to war. The temporary use of a right of way is something different from a permanent and wrongful possession of territory; and surely England would be easily able to obtain from Prince Bismarck ample and adequate guarantees that, at the close of the conflict, the territory of Belgium should remain intact as before?

You will see, sir, that I raise, in a very few words, an exceedingly important question. It is for the English people to perpend and pronounce. But it is high time they reflected on it.

I am, sir, your obedient servant, “DIPLOMATICUS.”
Upon this, The Standard, in a leading article, wrote as follows:

Standard Leading Article, February 4, 1887

We are reminded this morning, by a correspondent who speaks with high authority, that while we are all wondering how long it will be before a fresh conflict breaks out between France and Germany, Englishmen are shutting their eyes to a question closely, and perhaps inevitably, allied with that contingent event, and affecting the interests of this country more vitally than they could be affected even by any probable result from the struggle between those two powerful States. In the event of war between Germany and France, and in case either Germany or France were to disregard the neutrality of Belgian territory, what ought England to do? That is the question and he indicates pretty plainly a reply with which, we may at once say, we do not believe the English people will be disposed to quarrel. In order, however, to enable them to respond to the inquiry with full knowledge and deliberate judgment, it is necessary to lay before them the facts and the contingencies of the situation somewhat more amply and more in extenso than is done by “Diplomaticus.” On the declaration of war by France against Prussia in 1870, Earl Granville, as we all know, with more promptness and decision than be usually displayed, sought to secure respect for Belgian territory by notifying that, should either combatant ignore the neutrality secured to it by public treaty, England would side actively with the other combatant. It may be said, why cannot the same course be pursued once more in the event of a similar condition of affairs coming into play? The answer is that a similar condition of affairs no longer exists. In the first place, in 1870 neither of the combatants had any pressing necessity to resort to a violation of Belgian territory in the execution of their military designs.

The territory of Germany was avowedly vulnerable in several places, and France was so assured of her military superiority

—that no precautions had been taken against the possibility of France being invaded. . . . Metz and Strassburg are now German fortresses; and no one requires to be told that Germany has neglected no precautions or expedients to render the invasion of the territory of the Fatherland a difficult if not an impracticable undertaking. Armed to the head for offense, Germany is likewise armed to the heel for defense. She is more invulnerable than Achilles, for there is no point uncovered.

How stands it with France as regards defense against invasion? . . . Not only does France possess a first line of fortresses, contiguous to German territory, in Belfort, Epinal, Toul, and Verdun, but all four are linked with each other in succession by another line of detached forts . . . a direct advance by the German armies into France by the new fortresses and forts that have been erected and linked together would be, even if possible, a very hazardous undertaking. There are, however, two other ways of entering France from Germany. One is through Switzerland, the other is through Belgium. Both are what is understood by “neutral territory,” but the mountainous character of Switzerland renders access to France through its passes more arduous and less accessible than through the territory of Belgium. In case the German armies found themselves practically prevented from engaging in offensive military operations against France by the admirable line of defense with which she has provided herself, would Prince Bismarck and the great soldiers whom he would inspire consent to be thwarted by the inviolability of Belgium as guaranteed by European treaty? “Diplomaticus” puts the question with undiplomatic bluntness. He forbears from answering it, and so must we. But it will be obvious to everybody that there is a possibility, a danger, of Germany not being willing to be debarred from invading France by an obstacle that has grown up since the treaty guaranteeing the neutrality of Belgium was signed. Our readers will at once perceive that the situation is absolutely different from the one that existed in 1870 when Earl Granville quickly and cheerfully imposed on England the obligation to take part against either combatant that violated Belgian soil. Neither combatant was much tempted to do so, and thus the engagement assumed by England—a very proper one at the time—was not very serious or onerous and saved appearances rather than created responsibility. Now the situation is entirely changed. If England, with a view to securing respect for Belgian territory, were to bind itself, as in 1870, to throw its weight into the balance against either France or Germany, should either France or Germany violate Belgian ground, we might, and probably should, find ourselves involved in a war of giants on our own account.

We think that “Diplomaticus” understands the English people when he hints his suspicion that such a result would be utterly alien alike to their wishes and to their interests. For over and above the fact that, as we have seen, the temptation to violate Belgian territory by either side is much greater than it was in 1870, the relations of England with European Powers have necessarily and naturally undergone considerable modification during that period. We concur with our correspondent in the opinion he expresses that for England and Germany to quarrel, it matters not upon what subject, would be highly injurious to the interests of both. Indeed, he is right when he says that the main outlines of our policy would be blurred and its main purposes embarrassed, if not defeated, were we suddenly to find ourselves in a state of hostility to Germany instead of one of friendliness and sympathy. No doubt if Germany were to outrage the honor or disregard the interests of England we should be ready enough to accept the challenge thrown down to us. But would the violation of Belgian territory, whether by Germany or France, be such an injury to our honor and such a blow to our interests? It might be so in certain circumstances and it would assuredly be so if it involved a permanent violation of the independence of Belgium. But, as “Diplomaticus” ingeniously suggests, there is all the difference in the world between the momentary use of a “right of way,” even if the use of the right of way be, in a sense, wrongful, and the appropriation of the ground covered by the right of way. We trust that both Germany and France would refrain even from this minor trespass. But if they did not? If one or the other were to say to England, “All the military approaches to France and Germany have been closed, and only neutral approaches lie open to us. This state of things is not only detrimental but fatal to our military success, and it has arisen since the treaty guaranteed the sacredness of the only roads of which we can now avail ourselves. We will, as a fact, respect the independence of Belgium, and we will give you the most solemn and binding guarantees that at the end of the conflict Belgium shall be as free and independent as before,” if Germany (and of course our hypothesis applies also to France) were to use this language—though we trust there will be no occasion for it—we cannot doubt what would be the wise and proper course for England to pursue, and what would be the answer of the English Government. England does not wish to shirk its true responsibilities. But it would be madness for us to incur or to assume responsibilities unnecessarily when to do so would manifestly involve our participation in a tremendous war.

That week The Spectator, the organ of the respectable classes, commented upon these pronouncements as follows:

Spectator, Saturday, February 5, 1887News of the Week

. . . the general idea is that England will be kept out of this war. . . . That she will try to do so we do not doubt, but there is the Belgian difficulty ahead. Our guarantee for her is not a solitary one, and would not bind us to fight alone; but there are general interests to be considered. The probability is that we shall insist on her not becoming a theatre of war but shall not bar—as indeed we cannot bar—the traversing of her soil.

We think that these documents prove the grave statements by which we introduced them.

2.

THE BETRAYAL OF BELGIUM
WHAT THE ENGLISH LIBERALS ONCE SAID

(The Labour Leader, February 11, 1915)

The article we published recently from The Standard appeared in its issue of February 4, 1887. That afternoon the Pall Mall Gazette, then edited by Mr. Stead, whose aggressive Liberalism on the subject of small nationalities and sacredness of treaties is well known, published the following article:

“Pall Mall Gazette,” February 4, 1887

England and Belgium.
Are we bound to intervene?
There is no guarantee.
The Standard this morning gives special prominence to a letter signed “Diplomaticus” on the neutrality of Belgium. It also devotes its first leading article to the subject. The gist of these utterances may be summed up in two propositions: (1) England is under a treaty of obligation to defend the neutrality of Belgium; (2) But circumstances have altered since the contraction of the said obligation, and as against Germany, at any rate, England must pocket its pledges, and allow France to be invaded through Belgium without protesting or interfering.

Considerable importance is likely to be attributed to these conclusions abroad owing to its being understood that The Standard is at present the Governmental Salisburian organ. Each of the propositions laid down by our contemporary is, it will be seen, likely to be taken hold of. Germany. might read the second as an invitation to invade France through Belgium; France might read the first as an admission of our obligation to prevent, or rather to punish, such an infringement of neutral territory, if we dared.

It becomes important, therefore, to point out that The Standard’s argument rests on a false assumption. We do not for the present argue whether in the contingencies contemplated it would be England’s interest to intervene by declaring war against whichever belligerent might violate the neutrality of Belgium; we confine ourselves to the preliminary statement essential for clearing up the case—that it is not England’s obligation to do so.

The origin of the mistaken views prevailing on the question is undoubtedly a confusion between the Special Treaty of 1831 and 1839 which it temporarily superseded. By the treaty of 1870 the obligation of England was, of course, clear and specific. Here is the pledge which was given in the identical treaties concluded mutatis mutandis with both France and Prussia:

“Her Majesty the Queen of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland declares that if during the said hostilities the armies of France (or Prussia) should violate the neutrality of Belgium, she will be prepared to co-operate with his Prussian Majesty (or the Emperor of the French) for the defense of the same in such a manner as may be mutually agreed upon, employing for that purpose her naval and military forces to ensure its observance.”
There could be no doubt about that pledge; but then it expired twelve months after the conclusion of peace. At the expiration of that period, so the treaty continued:

“The independence and neutrality of Belgium will, so far as the High Contracting Parties are respectively concerned, continue to rest as heretofore on the first article of the Quintuple Treaty of the 19th of April, 1839.”
Now, what some people do is to read this treaty of 1839 by the light of the more specific treaty of 1870, and to deduce from the former the same obligation on the part of England to intervene against any infringement of Belgium’s neutrality as was contained in the 1870 treaty.

This, however, is a completely untenable proceeding. The treaty of 1839 must stand on its own legs, and these, it will be seen, are by no means very strong. The following are the terms of its second article:

“His Majesty the Emperor of Austria, King of Hungary and Bohemia, His Majesty the King of the French, Her Majesty the Queen of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, His Majesty the King of Prussia, and His Majesty the Emperor of all the Russias, declare that the articles hereby annexed to the treaty concluded this day between His Majesty the King of the Belgians and His Majesty the King of the Netherlands, Grand Duke of Luxembourg, are considered as having the same force and value as if they were textually inserted in the present act, and that they are thus placed under the guarantee of their Majesties.”
Here, then, we are sent off from the treaty between the Great Powers to the treaty between Belgium and the Netherlands. The seventh article of this treaty (which is identical with the same article of the 1831 treaty) runs:

“Belgium will form, within the limits indicated in 1, 2, and 4, an independent and perpetually neutral State. She will be bound to observe this same neutrality toward all other States.”
In this treaty it will be seen there is nothing about any guarantee; all that can be elicited from it, and from the one cited as referring to it, is this, that this clause is placed under the guarantee of “their said Majesties,” that is, England, Austria, France, Germany and Russia.

But that is not all. This constructive guarantee must be considered in relation to the party to whom it was given—namely to the Netherlands. For the treaty of 1839 was one between the five Powers on the one hand and the Netherlands on the other; and what the five Powers did was to guarantee to the Netherlands the treaty contracted between it and Belgium, one clause of which treaty said that Belgium should form, “an independent and perpetually neutral State” and should “be bound to observe such neutrality toward all other States.”

In the treaty of 1831, it is true, there was a further article guaranteeing the execution of all preceding articles (including, therefore, the one just cited in similar terms from the 1839 treaty) to the King of the Belgians, but in the 1839 treaty, on which the independence of Belgian is now said to rest, Lord Palmerston omitted any such guarantee.

There is, therefore, no English guarantee to Belgium. It is possible, perhaps, to “construct such a guarantee; but the case may be summed up as follows: (1) England is under no guarantee whatever except such as is common to Austria, France, Russia, and Germany; (2) that guarantee is not specifically of the neutrality of Belgium at all; and (3) is given not to Belgium but to the Netherlands.

Pall Mall Gazette, February 5, 1887OCCASIONAL NOTES.

The attempt of the Morning Post to prove that this country is under a guarantee to Belgium to defend its neutrality is highly unsuccessful. “The treaty of the 15th of November, 1831,” it says, “was cancelled by treaties of the 19th of April, 1839, but the provisions regarding the neutrality of Belgium remained intact.” This, as we pointed out yesterday, is not the case. The treaty of 1831 was with Belgium, and the execution of its articles (including one which provided for the neutrality of Belgium) was guaranteed to the King of the Belgians. But in the treaty of 1839, though the article asserting the neutrality of Belgium remains, the guarantee disappears. It is the more surprising that the Morning Post should be at such pains to prove that there is still a guarantee, since the only action it would in any case recommend being taken on it is a platonic protest. To construe a non-existent guarantee in order to have the privilege of uttering an unavailing protest is surely the very superfluity of futility.

But the line taken by the Morning Post is perhaps not quite so absurd as that which The Standard yesterday suggested, and a correspondent repeats this morning. We are to construct the guarantee and are then to declare our obligation to defend the neutrality of Belgium against all comers. But when any particular comer infringes that neutrality we are to grant him a special dispensation. The Standard and its correspondent speak only of giving this dispensation to Germany; what is to be allowed to Germany could not be denied to France. Our defense of the neutrality of Belgium would thus be never today but always every other day; it would be asserted against anyone in general, but withdrawn against anyone in particular. With such absurdities staring them in the face, it is surprising that our contemporaries do not take the trouble to ascertain that the guarantee which they are so ingeniously but unheroically whittling down does not in fact exist at all.

We wonder if national honour was held in less esteem in 1887 than in 1914. That cannot be the explanation of these articles and of the professions of Liberal and Tory politicians at the present moment. We have a shrewd suspicion that the real explanation is that in the minds of these politicians national honour is merely an affair of party convenience, that “circumstances” caused our diplomatists in 1887 to take one view, whereas in 1914 they caused the same gentlemen to take another view. The unsophisticated man in the street is steady all the time. He has an instinctive sense of what is right and what is wrong, and we shall have neither consistency nor honour in foreign politics until means are adopted which will enable him to control them. He is now a mere victim in the hands of Foreign Offices which muddle their business and the power to involve his life and his honour in whatever they say or do.

Taken from an appendix to Alexander Fuehr’s The Neutrality of Belgium (1915)

Read Full Post »

The Peace Treaty of Brest-Litovsk

Article I. Germany, Austria-Hungary, Bulgaria, and Turkey, for the one part, and Russia, for the other part, declare that the state of war between them has ceased. They are resolved to live henceforth in peace and amity with one another.

Article II. The contracting parties will refrain from any agitation or propaganda against the Government or the public and military institutions of the other party. In so far as this obligation devolves upon Russia, it holds good also for the territories occupied by the Powers of the Quadruple Alliance.

Article III. The territories lying to the west of the line agreed upon by the contracting parties which formerly belonged to Russia, will no longer be subject to Russian sovereignty; the line agreed upon is traced on the map submitted as an essential part of this treaty of peace. The exact fixation of the line will be established by a Russo-German commission.

No obligations whatever toward Russia shall devolve upon the territories referred to, arising from the fact that they formerly belonged to Russia.

Russia refrains from all interference in the internal relations of these territories. Germany and Austria-Hungary purpose to determine the future status of these territories in agreement with their population.

Article IV. As soon as a general peace is concluded and Russian demobilization is carried out completely Germany will evacuate the territory lying to the east of the line designated in paragraph 1 of Article III, in so far as Article IV does not determine otherwise.

Russia will do all within her power to insure the immediate evacuation of the provinces of eastern Anatolia and their lawful return to Turkey.

The districts of Erdehan, Kars, and Batum will likewise and without delay be cleared of the russian troops. Russia will not interfere in the reorganization of the national and international relations of these districts, but leave it to the population of these districts, to carry out this reorganization in agreement with the neighboring States, especially with Turkey.

Article V. Russia will, without delay, carry out the full demobilization of her army inclusive of those units recently organized by the present Government. Furthermore, Russia will either bring her warships into russian ports and there detain them until the day of the conclusion of a general peace, or disarm them forthwith. Warships of the States which continue in the state of war with the Powers of the Quadruple Alliance, in so far as they are within Russian sovereignty, will be treated as Russian warships.

The barred zone in the Arctic Ocean continues as such until the conclusion of a general peace. In the Baltic sea, and, as far as Russian power extends within the Black sea, removal of the mines will be proceeded with at once. Merchant navigation within these maritime regions is free and will be resumed at once. Mixed commissions will be organized to formulate the more detailed regulations, especially to inform merchant ships with regard to restricted lanes. The navigation lanes are always to be kept free from floating mines.

Article VI. Russia obligates herself to conclude peace at once with the Ukrainian People’s Republic and to recognize the treaty of peace between that State and the Powers of the Quadruple Alliance. The Ukrainian territory will, without delay, be cleared of Russian troops and the Russian Red Guard. Russia is to put an end to all agitation or propaganda against the Government or the public institutions of the Ukrainian People’s Republic.

Esthonia and Livonia will likewise, without delay, be cleared of Russian troops and the Russian Red Guard. The eastern boundary of Esthonia runs, in general along the river Narwa. The eastern boundary of Livonia crosses, in general, lakes Peipus and Pskow, to the southwestern corner of the latter, then across Lake Luban in the direction of Livenhof on the Dvina. Esthonia and Livonia will be occupied by a German police force until security is insured by proper national institutions and until public order has been established. Russia will liberate at once all arrested or deported inhabitants of Esthonia and Livonia, and insures the safe return of all deported Esthonians and Livonians.

Finland and the Aaland Islands will immediately be cleared of Russian troops and the Russian Red Guard, and the Finnish ports of the Russian fleet and of the Russian naval forces. So long as the ice prevents the transfer of warships into Russian ports, only limited forces will remain on board the warships. Russia is to put an end to all agitation or propaganda against the Government or the public institutions of Finland.

The fortresses built on the Aaland Islands are to be removed as soon as possible. As regards the permanent non- fortification of these islands as well as their further treatment in respect to military technical navigation matters, a special agreement is to be concluded between Germany, Finland, Russia, and Sweden; there exists an understanding to the effect that, upon Germany’s desire, still other countries bordering upon the Baltic Sea would be consulted in this matter.

Article VII. In view of the fact that Persia and Afghanistan are free and independent States, the contracting parties obligate themselves to respect the political and economic independence and the territorial integrity of these states.

Article VIII. The prisoners of war of both parties will be released to return to their homeland. The settlement of the questions connected therewith will be effected through the special treaties provided for in Article XII.

Article IX. The contracting parties mutually renounce compensation for their war expenses, i.e., of the public expenditures for the conduct of the war, as well as compensation for war losses, i.e., such losses as were caused [by] them and their nationals within the war zones by military measures, inclusive of all requisitions effected in enemy country.

Article X. Diplomatic and consular relations between the contracting parties will be resumed immediately upon the ratification of the treaty of peace. As regards the reciprocal admission of consuls, separate agreements are reserved.

Article XI. As regards the economic relations between the Powers of the Quadruple Alliance and Russia the regulations contained in Appendices II-V are determinative….

Article XII. The reestablishment of public and private legal relations, the exchange of war prisoners and interned citizens, the question of amnesty as well as the question anent the treatment of merchant ships which have come into the power of the opponent, will be regulated in separate treaties with Russia which form an essential part of the general treaty of peace, and, as far as possible, go into force simultaneously with the latter.

Article XIII. In the interpretation of this treaty, the German and Russian texts are authoritative for the relations between Germany and Russia; the German, the Hungarian, and Russian texts for the relations between Austria-Hungry and Russia; the Bulgarian and Russian texts for the relations between Bulgaria and Russia; and the Turkish and Russian texts for the relations between Turkey and Russia.

Article XIV. The present treaty of peace will be ratified. The documents of ratification shall, as soon as possible, be exchanged in Berlin. The Russian Government obligates itself, upon the desire of one of the powers of the Quadruple Alliance, to execute the exchange of the documents of ratification within a period of two weeks. Unless otherwise provided for in its articles, in its annexes, or in the additional treaties, the treaty of peace enters into force at the moment of its ratification.

In testimony whereof the Plenipotentiaries have signed this treaty with their own hand.

Executed in quintuplicate at Brest-Litovsk, 3 March, 1918.

Including Appendices: Russia-Germany, Part I
From World War I Document Archive
Jump to: navigation, search
Proceedings of the Brest-Litovsk Peace Conference
The Peace Negotiations Between Russia and the Central Powers
21 November, 1917-3 March, 1918
Appendices: Russia-Germany
(Washington, Government Printing Office, 1918)

——————————————————————————–

Introduction.
These accounts of the negotiations at Brest-Litovsk, between Russia (including Ukraine) on the one hand, and Germany, Austria-Hungary, Bulgaria, and Turkey on the other hand, have been taken from various sources. Official protocols of the sessions were provided for at the session on 3 December, but if they were ever published, they are not available at this time of compilation. Most of the following accounts have been taken from the (British) Daily Review of the Foreign Press and from the Deutscher Reichsanzeiger, the exact source of each being indicated. The official Russian reports as published in Isvestia are not available, but most of them seem to have been sent out by the Russian wireless and published in the (British) Daily Review of the Foreign Press. The versions given in the Deutscher Reichsanzeiger are probably as nearly official as were published in Germany.

——————————————————————————–

5. RUSSIA-CENTRAL POWERS

APPENDIX I, PROVIDED FOR IN ARTICLE III OF THE TREATY OF PEACE BETWEEN RUSSIA AND THE CENTRAL POWERS, OF 3 MARCH. 1918.(1)

[Translation with reconstruction. Parts in italics have been added frem a dispatch to the Department of State from Moscow, 20 April, 1918. Some spellings have been corrected according to Andree’s Handatlas.]

The line prescribed in Article 3 of the peace treaty with Russia, which in the west runs along Russian sovereignty, passes through the islands of Dago and Worms, between Mohn and the mainland between the islands Rüno and Küno, and in segmental curve passing through the bay of Riga, reaches the mainland slightly to the northwest, [northeast] of the mouth of the Livonian Aa, then in continuation of the curve it passes around Riga and to the east [west] of Üxküll (Oger Galle), crosses the Düna (Dvina). Then it follows the course of the Düna to the east of Dwinsk (Dünaberg) to the place where ended the former Courland frontier, almost to Druja, and from this place it extends in a straight line south-west crossing Strusty Lake to the southern part of Lake Driswjaty, leaving the locality Driswjaty itself to the east of the line.

From here the line bends in a south-southwest direction close to Mjelengjany on the German side. The localities Widsy and

——————————————————————————–

(1) The appendix consists ot a map, official copies of which do not seem to have been made public. The accompanying reproduction, see opposite page, has been taken from Vorwaerts, 5 March, 1918.

Tweretsch remain east of the line. It crosses the railway line from Swenziany to Lyntupy upon midway. The line then passes along a stream by the localities Michalischki and Gerwjany, both of which are left to the west of the line, along the rivers Oschmjanka and Loscha. The line itself in manifold windings reaches the railway from Wilna to Smorgon, which it crosses somewhat west of Slobodka. Here the line bends, running straight to Klewisa on the German side, by Oschmjany and Dsewenischki on the east, and Geranony on the west, along the rivers Opita and Gawja to the Niemen.

The line now follows the downward course of the Niemen to a point above Mosty, and here it bends directly to the south into the river course of the Selwianka, which it follows to Roshany, which remains to the east of the line. From here it passes in a southwest direction (along the Temra) to the Ukrainian border where Prushany is reached. From here it passes between Borowiri (?) and Szolzhentiza(?), between Koski (?) and Dobruschin (?), and west of the road from Prushany to Vidoml passes in straight line the bends of the river Liesna, leaving Vidoml on the Russian side. The line ends on the river Liesna north of Brest-Litovsk, Szmolienitza (?) and Bobruschin (?) remain to the east of the line, Riga, Jacobstadt, Dwinsk, Svenzjany, Vilna, Lida, Wolkowysk, and Konstantinow on the German side.

An absolutely exact determination of the line will be established through a Russo-German Commission.

6. RUSSIA-GERMANY.

APPENDIX II TO THE TREATY OF PEACE, SIGNED AT BREST-LITOVSK, 3 MARCH, 1918. (1)

(1) Ratifications exchanged at Berlin, 29 March, 1918 (Neue Freie Presse, 6 July, morning edition; cf infra, p. 139).

[Translation.]

In regard to the economic relations between Germany and Russia the following is agreed upon:

1. The Russo-German commercial treaty of 1894/1904 does not again take effect.(2)

The contracting parties obligate themselves to begin negotiations regarding the conclusion of a new commercial treaty as soon as possible after the conclusion of a general peace between Germany on the one hand, and the European countries at present at war with her and the United States of America and Japan on the other hand.

2. Until such time, and in any case up to 31 December, 1919, the regulations contained in this appendix, and constituting an integral part of the present peace treaty, shall be made the basis of their mutual commercial relations. Both contracting parties, are, however, free to repudiate these regulations after 30 June, 1919, on condition of giving six months notice. In case this right of repudiation is utilized before the 31 December, 1922, then, until 31 December, 1925, in case the denunciation ensues after 31 December, 1922,

——————————————————————————–

(2) 86 British and Foreign State Papers, pp. 442, 449, 482, 461, 473; 97 British and Foreign State Papers, p. 1040.

for a term of three years reckoning from the date of the cessation of the activity of the stipulations contained in the present appendix, the subjects, the commercial, industrial, and financial companies, including insurance companies, the produce of agriculture and industries, and the vessels of each of the two contracting parties shall enjoy the most favored nation treatment in the territory of the other party. These regulations extend particularly:

a) To acquisition and ownership of movable and immovable property, disposition of same, occupations in commerce, trades, and professions, as well as to dues levied in these instances;

b) To import, export, and transit of goods, to customs dues and customs formalities, to internal dues on consumption and the like, and to traffic prohibitions;

c) To the treatment accorded by the governmental or state-controlled administrations of monopolies of one of the contracting parties to buyers or sellers of the other party in the fixing of prices, or in other business conduct;

d) To the transportation and transportation tariffs on railways and other ways of communication;

e) To the admission and status of ships, their crews and cargoes, as well as to ships’ dues;

f) To the transportation of passengers by forwarding agencies, including transportation of emigrants by land and sea and other activities of emigration agents.

3. During the entire time of the application of the principles of the most favored nation, neither of the parties shall establish, to the detriment of the opposite party, on the frontiers of its territory, higher import or export duties than on any other frontier.

Furthermore, in the course of ; this period, Russia shall neither prohibit the export of rough and hewn lumber, nor levy export duty on the same, in so far as it is not especially mentioned in No. 6 of the Schedule of Export Duties; neither shall it prohibit the export of, or levy export duty on ores of any kind.

4. Russia shall not claim the advantages which Germany grants to Austria-Hungary or to any other country allied with her by a customs union, and adjoining Germany either immediately or through an intervening country allied with her or with Austria-Hungary by customs union. Colonies, outlying possessions and territories under protectorate, in this respect are placed on the same basis as the mother country.

Germany shall not claim the advantages which Russia grants to another country connected with her by customs union, and adjoining Russia either immediately, or through an intervening country allied with her by customs union, or to the colonies, outlying posessions or territories under the protectorate of a country allied with her by customs union.

5. In so far as in neutral countries there are located goods originating in Germany or Russia and subject to prohibition of import into the territory of the other contracting party elther directly or through the intermedium of ts another country, such limitations as to the disposition of such goods shall be cancelled as regards the contracting parties. Both contracting parties, therefore, obligate themselves immediately to advise the Governments of neutral countries of the above-stated cancellations of the limitations mentioned .

6. Privileges granted by one of the contracting parties during the time of the war to other countries in the form of concessions or other state measures, must be revoked or extended to the opposite party by granting equal rights.

7. In so far as in the tariff appendix A, or elsewhere, there are no stipulations to the contrary, the general Russian Customs Tariff of the 13/26 January, 1903,(1) shall be applied for the whole period of life of the present provisorium as well as of the most-favored nation treatment granted both by Clause 2.

8. The agreements which existed between the German Empire and Russia on 31 July, 1914, in regard to Russian sugar shall remain in force during the life of the present provisorium and during the mutual application of the most favored nation principle in accordance with Clause 2.

9. The contracting parties are agreed that, with the conclusion of peace, the war terminates also in the field of economy and finance. They engage not to participate either directly or indirectly in measures having for their aim the continuance of hostilities in economic or financial spheres, but to hinder such measures within the boundaries of the territories of their State by all means in their power.

In the course of the intermediate period required for the removal of the consequences of war and for the organization of new relations, the contracting parties bind themselves not to put, in so far as it is possible, any difficulties in the way of the acquisition of necessary goods by introducing high import duties, and they express their willingness to enter immediately into negotiations for the purpose of maintaining and enlarging as far as feasible the customs exemptions established during the time of the war.

7. RUSSIA-GERMANY.
SUB-APPENDIX 1 TO APPENDIX II OF THE TREATY OF PEACE BETWEEN RUSSIA AND THE CENTRAL POWERS. SIGNED AT BREST-LITOVSK, 3 MARCH, 1918.(1)

——————————————————————————–

(1) Ratifications exchanged at Berlin, 29 March, 1918 (Neue Freie Presse, 6 July, morning edition; cf. infra, p. 139).

[Translation.]

ARTICLE 1.

The subjects of one of the contracting parties, who have settled on the territory of the opposite party or reside temporarily in the same, shall enjoy, in their commercial and industrial activities, the same rights as the native inhabitants, and shall not be subjected to higher or to other taxes. In the territory of the other party they, in all respects, shall enjoy the same rights, privileges, franchises, advantages, and exemptions as the subjects of the most favored nation.

Both parties are, however, agreed that special laws, decrees, and orders, relating to trade, commerce, industry, and police, which govern or will govern in either of the contracting countries, and which apply to all foreigners, will not be affected by these considerations.

ARTICLE 2.

The subjects of both contracting parties shall have the right, on the territory of the other party, on a basis of equality with the native inhabitants, to acquire, to possess, and to manage movable and immovable property of every kind as well as to dispose of the same in the way of sale, exchange, gift, matrimony, legacy, a or any other method, as well as to receive inheritances through will or on the basis of the law, n without being subjected in any of the cases mentioned, in one way or another, to higher dues, taxes, or collection than native inhabitants.

Each of the contracting parties reserves the right to make exceptions to these stipulations for those parts of their respective territories which have been declared frontier districts or fortress regions.

However, in none of these cases above mentioned shall the subjects of one of the parties in the territory of the other party be placed in a less favorable condition than the subjects of any third country.

The subjects of both contracting parties may, provided they observe the laws of the country, take out, unhindered, the proceeds of the sale of their property, and, in general, their belongings, without being obliged, in their capacity as foreigners, to pay special or higher dues than native inhabitants in the same circumstances.

Subject to the local laws, they shall have free admission to law oourts, where they may appear as claimants or defendants, and shall enjoy in this respect all rights and immunities of native inhabitants and also, like the latter, they shall have the right to employ in every law suit the attorneys and agents admitted under the local laws.

ARTICLE 3.

The subjects of each of the contracting parties, in the territory of thc opposite party, shall not be subject to juridical, administrative, or municipal duties, with the exception of guardianships. They are likewise exempt from any personal service in the army, fleet, reserve of the territorial army and of the navy, the national militia, as also from all duties, compulsory loans, military requisitions, and service of any kind, imposed, in case of war, or as a result of exceptional circumstances; duties connected by any title whatsoever with the ownership of a parcel of land, and also the military quartering duty and other special services to be rendered to the active army, to which are liable the native inhabitants and the subjects of the most favored nation in their capacity of proprietors and lessees of real estate are excepted.

ARTICLE 4.

Joint stock companies and any other commercial, industrial, or financial companies, including insurance companies, which have been lawfully formed in one of the two countries in accordance with existing laws, and have their abode there, must be recognized by the other country as existing lawfully and shall, in particu lar, enioy in the same the right to conduct lawsuits in the courts in the capacity of claimants or defendants.

Both parties, however, agree that the foregoing stipulation does not affect the questlon whether such companies, formed in one of the countries, shall be admitted, or not, to commercial or industrial activity in the other country. This question depends as heretofore, on the regulations already existing or to be introduced in the country in question.

In any case, the aforesaid companies shall enjoy in the other country the same rights as have been granted or may be granted to similar companies of any other country.

ARTICLE 5.

The contracting parties obligate themselves not to impede the mutual relations of the two countries by any prohibitions of import, export, or transit, and to permit free transit.

Exceptions are only admissible for such articles as are or will be considered a State monopoly in the territory of one of the contracting Parties, as also for certain articles respecting which exceptional prohibitional rules may be issued for reasons of hygiene, veterinary supervision, and public safety, or for other weighty political or economic reasons especially in connection with the after-war transition period.

During the after-war transition period, for the purpose of overcoming the consequences of the war, regulations may be issued limiting intercourse, as well as prohibiting import, export, and transit: they must be enforced in such manner as to be felt as slightly as possible, and as soon as circumstances permit, they must be rescinded.

ARTICLE 6.

The products of Russian agriculture and industry imported into Germany, and the products of German agriculture and industry imported into Russia, shall in the country of their importation be on the same footlng as the products of the most favored nation, regardless of whether they be intended for consumption or for storage, for re-export, or for transit. In no case, and on no account, shall they be subjected to any higher or other duties, taxes, fees, or contributions, or to extra charges, or to import prohibitions, if the same does not apply to similar products of any other country. In particular, every advantage and facility, every exemption from and reduction of import duties of the general and conventional tariffs, which one of the contracting parties, permanently or temporarily, without a corresponding benefit or against compensations, grants to a third country, shall be granted to the products of agriculture and industry of the other country without further formality and without any conditions, reservations, or compensations.

ARTICLE 7.

The products of German agriculture and industry mentioned in the appended ‘I’ariff A, on being imported into Russia, and the products of Russian agriculture and industry, specified in the appended Tariff B, when being imported into Germany, shall not be subjected to any special or higher import duty than that stipulated in the said appendices.

Should one of the contracting parties assess any of the articles of domestic production or manufacture specified in appendices A or B, for the benefit of the State Exchequer by means of any new internal tax or excise, or addition to such internal tax or excise, similar articles when being imported may be taxed with an equal or corresponding duty on condition that this duty shall be the same for the products of all countries.

ARTICLE 8.

Internal duties, which are now being levied or may be levied hereaftcr in the territory of one of the contracting parties for account of the State, of committees, or of societies, for the production, preparation, forwarding, sale, or consumption of any article may be levied on similar articles of the other party, but under no pretext at a higher rate or in a more oppressive fashion than on the produce of the home country. In so far as internal duties are levied on raw materials and half finished products, the making of a suitable tax agreement for the importation of such products made from such raw materials and half finished products shall be admissible, even in case similar home products are not taxed directly.

Each of the contracting parties is at liberty, for the purpose of obtaining national income, to establish a monopoly on suitable articles, or to subject the same to regulations analogous to a monopoly. In this case the foregoing regeulations are made correspondingly applicable.

ARTICLE 9.

In exporting goods from either of the two countries into the other, no other nor higher export duties shall be levied than those levied on exports into the most favored country. Furthermore, any advantage granted on exports of one of the contracting parties to a third country is automatically and unconditionally extended to the other party.

ARTICLE 10.

Goods of any kind, passing through the territory of either of the parties, shall reciprocally be exempt from any transit dues, irrespective of whether they go through immediately or be unloaded while in transit, warehoused, and then reloaded.

ARTICLE 11.

The stipulations of the present agreement do not affect:

1. Advantages which are granted now, or may be granted in the future, to other adjacent countries for facilitating local intercourse, within a boundary zone of fifteen kilometers in width.

2. Advantages which either of the contracting parties grants or will grant in the future to another country in virtue of an existing or future customs union.

3. Import or export advantages which are granted now, or may be granted in the future, to the inhabitants of the province of Archangel.

However, German imports into that territory shall enjoy, to an equal extent, all customs advantages granted to any European or North American country.

ARTICLE 12.

Merchants, manufacturers, and other persons engaged in industrial enterprises who prove by presentation of a legal certificate ssued to them by the authorities of their home country that they have the right to engage in commereial dealings in the country where they reside permanently, may, either personally or through commercial travelers in their employ, purchase goods in the territory of the other contracting party, or solicit orders, bringing with them samples of goods. The said merchants, manufacturers, or other persons engaged in industrial pursuits, as well as commercial travelers, shall reciprocally enjoy in both countries the same rights as regards passports and dues on commercial dealings as do the subjects ol the most favored nation.

Persons provided with a certificate entitling them to engage in industrial pursuits (commercial travelers) may carry with them samples of any kind, but not goods. Articles, liable to duty, which are brought in by the above mentioned persons, are exempted, by both parties, from both import and export duties, but on condition that, in case these articles are not sold, they be taken out again within a year’s time, and that there be no doubt as to the identity of the articles brought in and taken out again. It is immaterial through which custorrt house the goods are taken out.

The taking out of samples of merchandise must be guaranteed, when imported, by making a deposit of the amount of the respective customs duty, or by some other guarantees.

The contracting parties will inform eaeh other as to what authorities are entitled to issue certificates for the privilege of engaging in industrial enterprises, of the form which these certificates will take, and the rules which the travelers must reserve during the time of their industrial activities.

The subjects of either of the contracting parties, going into the territory of the other to visit fairs and bazaars, to trade or to sell their products, are mutually placed, by both parties, in the same position as the native inhabitants and shall not be subjected to higher dues.

ARTICLE 13.

In regard to mutual safeguarding of author’s rights as regards literary, artistic, or photographic products, the stipulations of the agreement concluded between the German Empire and Russia under date of 28 February l913, shall apply in the relations between Germany and Russia.

In regard to mutual safeguarding of trade-marks the stipulations of the declaration of 23/l l July, 1873,(1) shall govern also in the future.

——————————————————————————–

(1) This footnote is smeared in the printed version and largely illegible. Ed.

ARTICLE 14.

German vessels and their cargoes in Russia, as well as Russian vessels and their cargoes in Germany, shall be placed on the same footing as local ships and cargoes, regardless of where the vessel sailed from or whither bound, regardless also of the origin or destination of their cargoes.

Every prerogative and every immunity which may be granted by one of the contracting parties to a third country, shall be extended automatically and unconditionally to the other party.

However, exception is made from the foregoing stipulations:

a) In regard to those special privileges which, in either country, now exist, or may be granted in the future, to the home fisheries and their produce:

b) In regard to the privileges granted now or in the future to the national merchant fleet.

The stipulations of the present agreement do not apply to coast-wise shipping which, as heretofore, shall be regulated in both countries by existing or future laws. However, in any case German and Russian vessels shall be permitted to sail from a port of one of the contracting parties to one or more ports of the same country, whether for complete or partial discharge of the cargo brought from abroad, or for taking on or completing a cargo destined for abroad.

ARTICLE 15.

The nationality of vessels is recognized by both parties in accordance with the laws and regulations of each country, on the basis of documents and letters patent issued by the proper authorities and found on the vessel.

Certificates of tonnage measurement, issued by either of the contracting parties, shall be recognized by the other party in accordance with special agreements concluded, or to be concluded between the contracting parties.

ARTICLE 16.

German vessels, arriving at a Russian port, and on the other hand, Russian vessels arriving at a German port, merely for the purpose of completing their cargo there, or for partially discharging the same, may retain and bring out again a definite part of the cargo destined for another port of the same country or for another country on condition that they observe the laws and regulations of the country in question; in this case they are not obliged to pay any dues for this part of their cargo with the exception of the inspection fees, which shall, however, be levied only at the rate established for local vessels.

ARTICLE 17.

From tonnage dues and clearance fees are wholly exempt in the ports of either country:

1. Vessels arriving from any place in ballast and leaving again in ballast;

2. Vessels which, coming from a harbor of one of the two countries into one or more harbors of the same country, can prove that they paid the said fees in another harbor of the same country;

3. Vessels which voluntarily or of necessity arrive with cargo at a port and leave it without having effected any trade.

This exemption shall not extend to lighthouse, pilotage, towing, quarantine, or other dues which are payable on the vessel for services rendered or apparatus used and which are established in the interest of traffic, and which are equally payable by native ships, and by those belonging to the most favored nation.

lf a vessel came to the port through necessity, the unloading and reloading of merchandise necessitated bv repairs to the ship, the transferring of cargo into another vessel on account of the unworthiness of the former, the purchases of necessary provisions for the crew, the sale of deteriorated goods with the consent of the customs authorities, shall not be considered as a commercial transaction.

ARTICLE 18.

In case a vessel of one of the contracting parties is stranded or wrecked on the coast of the other country, the vessel, as well as the cargo, shall enjoy the same advantages and immunities which the laws of the respective countries extend to its own vessels in similar circumstances. All aid and assistance shall be given to the master and to the crew, as regards their persons, the ship, and the cargo.

The contracting parties are further agreed that salvaged goods shall not be subject to customs duties unless intended for local consumption.

ARTICLE 19.

The use of highways and other thoroughfares, canals, locks, ferries, bridges, and bridge openings, harbors and quays, channel-marks and lights, pilots, lifting cranes and scales, warehouses, coast-guards and institutions for salvage and safe-keeping of ships’ cargoes, and so forth, in so far as these constructions or institutions are intended for general communication and for public traffic and trade in general, irrespective of whether they are managed by the State, or by private persons with the consent of the State, shall be granted to the subjects of the other contracting party on the same conditions and against payment of equal dues as to the subjects of the home country.

With the exception of deviations permissiblo in regard to lighthouses and pilots, these dues shall only be levied if the above mentioned constructions and institutions have actually been utilized.

ARTICLE 20.

Both contracting parties reserve the right to establish their own railway tariffs at their own discretion.

However, neither in respect to freight rates nor in respect to the time and method of forwarding shall any difference be made between the subjects of either contracting party. Especially on consignments of goods coming from Russia and destined for a German station, or passing through Gcrmany in transit, no higher rates shall be levied on German railways than on similar German or foreign products going in the same direction and on the same section of the road. The same shall apply on Russian railways for consignments of goods from Germany destined for Russian stations or passing through Russia in transit.

Exceptions from the foregoing stipulations shall be admissible only in so far as consignments at reduced rates for public or charitable purposes are concerned.

——————————————————————————–
Including Appendices: Russia-Germany, Part II
From World War I Document Archive
Jump to: navigation, search
Proceedings of the Brest-Litovsk Peace Conference
The Peace Negotiations Between Russia and the Central Powers
21 November, 1917-3 March, 1918
Appendices: Russia-Germany
(Washington, Government Printing Office, 1918)

——————————————————————————–

Introduction.
These accounts of the negotiations at Brest-Litovsk, between Russia (including Ukraine) on the one hand, and Germany, Austria-Hungary, Bulgaria, and Turkey on the other hand, have been taken from various sources. Official protocols of the sessions were provided for at the session on 3 December, but if they were ever published, they are not available at this time of compilation. Most of the following accounts have been taken from the (British) Daily Review of the Foreign Press and from the Deutscher Reichsanzeiger, the exact source of each being indicated. The official Russian reports as published in Isvestia are not available, but most of them seem to have been sent out by the Russian wireless and published in the (British) Daily Review of the Foreign Press. The versions given in the Deutscher Reichsanzeiger are probably as nearly official as were published in Germany.

——————————————————————————–

8. RUSSIA-GERMANY.

FINAL PROTOCOL TO SUB APPENDIX 1 OF APPENDIX II TO THE PEACE TREATY BETWEEN RUSSIA AND THE CENTRAL POWERS. SIGNED 3 MARCH, 1918.1

[Translation.]

PART FIRST
REFERRING TO THE TEXT OF THE TREATY

To Article 1.

Household effects which have already been in use and movable property of subjects of either contracting party who intend to settle on the territory of the other party, shall be exempt in the latter territory from any import duties.

German official consulates and the employes of diplomatic and of said consular institutions dispatched to Russia, shall have the right to receive newspapers and works of science, art, and literature, entirely exempt from the Russian censorship.

The privileges and immunities accorded, as per Article 2 of the Treaty between Germany and Russia of 8 December/26 November, 1874,2 to consular employees, are also extended to special officials attached to German consulates in Russia and also to the agents of the Russian Ministry of Finance and to their secretaries (or attachés) in Germany.

——————————————————————————–

1: Ratifications exchanged at Berlin, 29 March, 1918 (Neue Freie Presse, 6 July, morning edition; cf. infra, p. 139).
2: 65 British and Foreign State Papers, p. 244.

To Articles l and 12.

In regard to passports the subjects of both countries are placed on a footing with the most favored nation.

The passport visée in Russia holds good for six months.

The decision includes the visée of the passports of German commercial travelers of the Hebrew faith.

The fee for issuing foreign passports to Germans living in Russia is not to exceed 50 Copecks. Russia will in the future also grant a term of 28 days for the validity of legitimation certificates available wlthin the limits of a frontier zone 30 kilometers wide, allowing the bearers the right of repeatedly crossing the frontier at different points as at present. This term will be reckoned by both parties from the day on which the certificate is first used for crossing the frontier, but the certificates expire if not used for the first time at the latest within fifteen days after the date of issue. This term of 28 days is in no way affected by the beginning of a new year during the time for which the certificate is available. These certificates, which shall be issued in two languages, German and Russian, are to be given by either country only to its own subjects and to such subjects of the other State who reside in the country in which the certificate is issued.

The day on which the frontier is crossod will in future be marked on the certificate by both Russian and German authorities, according to both the Russian and German calendar. Certificates will be given in future, as at present, both to Christians and Hebrews.

Each contracting parties will allow its subjects to pass temporarily to the territory of the other party for agricultural and industrial purposes and will raise no obstacles particularly as regards passport regulations. The representatives of organizations under state inspection which are established in the territory of one Party to act as agencies for enlisting such workmen, and regarding which the government of this party will notify the government of thc other party, are without further formalities admitted within the territory of the latter and may exercise without hindrance their functions as agents.

Russian workmen entering Germany for agricultural or other kindred occupations, shall be provided as heretofore, free of charge, with legitimation papers valid from l February to 20 December, new style.

These papers also shall be written in the Russian and German languages.

To Article 3.

In so far as the subjects of a third State, on the strength of existing treaties and agreements, are exempt in Russia from guardianship, German subjects in Russia shall enjoy the same privilege in respect to guardianship of non-German minors.

To Article 5.

Veterinary measures introduced by the German Government with regard to Russian import may not be applied more strictly than with regard to States which, in respect to contagious diseases of animals and in respect to veterinary institutions, are in the same condition as Russia.

This regulation does not apply to agreements relative to veterinary measures between Germany and Austria-Hungary.

The number of live pigs, which according to existing regulations may be lmported into upper Silesia is increased to twenty-five hundred per week.

Meat, which by the German Meat Inspection Law of 3 June, 1900, is considered as dressed, is allowed to be imported into Germany in accordance with regulations of the law referred to.

The concessions stipulated in paragraphs 3 and 4 preceding, may be temporarily suspended or revoked, if this is necessitated by extraordinary considerations arising from veterinary supervision.

To Articles 5, 6, 7, 9, and 10.

Whereas in Russia at the present time certain goods are subject to higher customs duty, when imported across the land frontier, than when imported by the Baltic Sea, the Parties are agreed that from the day of the coming into force of the present treaty, the duties on imports across the land frontier shall be reduced to conform with the rates of duty on imports by the Baltic Sea and that no new tariff be introduced discriminating in favor of imports by sea.

The German Government on its part binds itself not to introduce on any frontier of the German Empire different or more favorable customs duties than on its eastern frontier.

To Article 6.

The German Federal Council will not avail itself at any time during the life of the present treaty of its prerogative to revoke the pormission given for establishing mixed warehouses for grain in transit at Königsberg, Danzig, Altona, Mannheim, and Ludwigshafen.

To Articles 6, 7, and 11.

When the agricultural and industrial products of a third Power which are transported through the territory of one of the contracting parties, are imported into the other country, they shall not be subject to payment of other or higher duties than if they had been imported directly from the country of their origin.

To Articles 6 to 9.

The Russian Government declares itself prepared to accept German gold coins in payment of customs duties, at the exchange rate of 1,000 Marks gold for 462 Roubles (1 Rouble=1/15 Imperial). The Russian custom houses will accept German Imperial Bank Notes at the same rate of exchange in payment of customs duties.

To Articles 6 and 7.

In respect to the importation of goods, which are subject according to their country of origin to different customs duties, the contracting parties reserve the right to demand certificates of origin as evidence of domestic production or manufacture. Both parties will take care that the above certificates shall restrict trade as little as possible.

To Article 12.

In order to exercise in Russia the right provided for by Paragraph 1 of Article 12, the persons there mentioned shall be provided with special trade certificates, government fee for which shall not exceed 150 Roubles for a whole year and 75 Roubles for the second half of the year.

If persons provided with the said trade certificates desire to exercise the right stipulated in Paragraph 1 of Article 12, through commercial travelers in their employ, the latter shall be provided with special personal trade certificates, the fee for which must not exceed 50 Roubles for a whole year or 25 Roubles for the second half of a year.

Trade certificates, provided for by paragraph 1 of the present regulation, may be issued in the names of persons going to Russia, and in this case such persons do not need to provide themselves with personal trade certificates.

With the issuing trade certificates and the collecting of fees for same, no distinction will be made between those professing the Christian and the Hebrew religions.

In so far as the importation of firearms into Russia is not prohibited, German merchants may bring with them samples of such weapons, but only under the express condition that these merchants submit to all general and local regulations which are or will be in force regarding firearms.

To Article 14.

The contracting parties reserve to themselves the right of concluding a special agreement regarding navigation and rafting on inland waters which directly or indirectly connect both countries. Until the conclusion of this agreement German vessels, their crews, and German raftsmen on Russian inland waterways, and Russian vessels, their crews, and Russian raftsmen on German inland waterways may engage in towing and commercial navigation, including the transportation of passengers as well as rafting under the same conditions as the natives themselves.

German vessels bound for Russia on inland waterways which connect both countries, intending to return to Germany, are admitted into Russia without having to pay import duty or making a deposit as security for same.

The time within which such vessels must return to Germany is two years from the day of their arrival in Russia. Should a vessel be sold in Russia or remain there more than two years, the corresponding import duty must be paid. Should the vessel be detained, owing to circumstances beyond the captain’s control, such as low waterlevel, average demanding considerable repairs, and other similar reasons, the above-mentioned period must be extended. Import duties are not levied should the vessel be lost through fire or wreck.

No fees shall be paid for certificates stipulating the re-exit of vessels or payment of import duties.

The certificate of the ship’s gauge will be deposited with the Russian customs authorities for the term of the vessel’s stay in Russia.

To Article 20.

The contracting parties will support each other, as far as possible, in the question of railroad tariffs, in particular by means of establishing through freight tariffs. Such through freight tariffs should be established to facilitate the export from Russia, as well as as the import to Russia, in accordance with the demands of trade, particularly regarding the German ports, Danzig (Neufahrwasser), Königsborg (Pillau), and Memel.

In respect to the articles which in the Russian railroad tariff are classified under grain, also in regard to flax, hemp and wood, freight tariffs from Russian stations of departure to the above-named ports shall be drawn up and distributed among German and Russian railways participating in the transportation, in accordance with the present regulations regarding Russian railways leading to the ports of Libau and Riga, or such regulations as may be subsequently introduced. The same holds good in the case of re-forwarding. Extra charges which may be collected in addition to the freight tariff rates shall be drawn up in the same manner and the total, in agreement with Russian regulations, shall be divided among the railroads concerned; in this connection, an agreement has been arrived at, to the effect that only one frontier tax shall be collected, divided equally between the Russian and German lines leading to the frontier.

The special provisions for regulating competition between Königsberg and Danzig which are now in force shall remain so.

Tariff favors granted on German or Russian railways to goods imported by sea, must, at the demand of the interested Government, be granted by railways leading from the frontier to similar products over the rail stretch lrom the frontier station to the receiving station. In this case the extent of the favors granted per kilometer or per verst in traffic across the inland frontier, should be the same as in traffic through sea ports.

No distinction, especially in respect to tariff rates, is to be made in regard to the nationality of the importing vessels of the contracting parties, in case the imported goods are further transported by rail or by inland waterways.

The Russian Government will see to it that railway freight tariffs, for transportation from Russia to Germany of phosphorites and other phosphates, as well as ores, in force until 1 August, 1914, should not be increased to a greater extent than corresponds to the general average increase of the Russian railway tariffs in proportion to distances in the same way as these were used as a basis of the tariffs in question prior to 1 August /19 July, 1914. At the request of the German Government, the sea tariffs will be applied to new stations of departure and destination.

The contracting parties agree, that in regard to railway matters, mutual trafhc relations between Germany and Russia shall be the same as before the war, and that disadvantages, which might result from the subdivision of the Russian railway system into independent railway systems,will be as far as possible removed. To this end both parties are prepared to concur in a convention, binding on the railways of Germany, Russia, and the States and administered territories which have detached themselves from the Russian Empire, to regulate in this sense the stipulations contained in Article 20 of the present treaty and in this concluding protocol, and especially to reestablish the continuity of railway tariffs, existing before the war, for communication with the ports of the Baltic Sea, the Black and the Azoff Seas.

PART SECOND.
TO THE CUSTOMS REGULATIONS.

§1.

Authorization to consign goods under customs control to other custom houses is extended by both parties to all custom houses of the first class, which have no railroad communications with the offices having warehouses. It is stipulated, however, that such consignments remain subject to pertinent laws and regulations.

§ 2.

Both parties agree that the custom houses of both countries shall remain open every day of the year, except Sundays and legal holidays.

§ 3.

The time tables of office hours shall be posted in the custom houses of both countries.

Office hours for examination of passports and legitimation cards shall be fixed for each district and for each frontier crossing, by special agreemont between the respective departments of the two countries. Both parties shall appoint the same hours, taking into account local needs, and in custom houses of the third class, in supplementary custom houses, and at frontier crossings, a recess shall be granted for the employees’ meals.

§ 4.

Merchandise liable to customs duty, imported by persons having a duly executed permit to cross the frontier, may be declared orally in both countries and at all custom houses within the limits of their competency, provided the merchandise is not imported for the purpose of trade and that the sum due as customs duty does not exceed:

Fifteen Roubles for imports to Russia; and

Thirty-five Marks for imports to Germany.

Transfer offices are hereby empowered to clear foodstuffs (with the exception of brandy and other spirituous liquors) as well as articles exclusively intended for household use.

§ 5.

Without derogating from special regulations regarding river craft, vehicles of every kind together with their accessories, which during their importation serve to carry passengers or goods, and which are only for this purpose temporarily brought into Russia by persons known to the Russian or German customs authorities, are admitted by Russian authorities free of dues and without depositing security for such duty, if the carrier obhgates himself to reexport the same within a specified time. The obligation to this effect, which must be in writing, shall be made out free of charge.

§ 6.

No special declaration of goods imported into Russia by land is necessary, if the goods are accompanied by a way bill. In such instances it is sufficient to present the way bill to the Customs Officer at the time of entry. The number of horses and vehicles in a transport as well as the total of way bills and packages are entered on one of the way bills which entry is then signed by the head driver.

§ 7.

Flowers and living plants, fresh fruit, and fresh fish, as well as all rapidly perishable goods, shall except when prevented by force majeure, be cleared by both parties inside of 24 hours after arrival of the goods at the customs warehouses.

§ 8.

The charges for affixing identification marks to the goods are not to exceed 5% of the customs duty.

The charges for affixing identification seals in the case of buttons, ribbons, lace, embroideries, and furs are not to exceed l Copeck for each seal. The total charge in each individual case for sealing is not to exceed 5% of the amount of the import duty.

But if the interested person wishes that the merchandise should be sealed in a manner exceeding the needs of identification, the said person is bound to pay the additional charge thereby incurred.

The stamping of German gold and silver ware is not liable to higher or special charges than the stamping of similar articles of home production.

§ 9

Storage on imported goods shall he collected by the Russian customs authorities only for the exact time the goods were in storage in the customs warehouses beginning from the fourth day after the customs examination began.

However, the period for which no storage charges are made shall be limited by the time allowed in each custom house for declaring imported goods, that is, 5 to 14 days, with the addition of the 3 days provided for in paragraph 1 preceding.

§ 10.

As long as this Treaty remains in force, the Russian Government binds itself not to alter in any way the stipulations of Articles 15 and 16 of the Berne Convention of 14 October, 1890,1 which regulate the sender’s right to dispose of the goods.

——————————————————————————–

1: 82 British and Foreign State Papers, pp. 771, 796.

§ 11.

The stipulation contained in Article 292 of the Russian Regulations of 15 May, 1901, concerning the importation of goods, according to which the difference between the weight declared and the actual weight of the goods as revealed at the examination, if not exceeding 5% of the total weight of the goods, is modified, and the limit of permissible difference increased to 10% of the total weight.

§ 12.

The right of complaint against decisions of Russian custom house authorities regarding fines for incorrect or fraudulent declaration, or regarding the tariff classifications of merchandise, belongs to the sender of the goods, as well as to the declarant.

Such complaints may be drawn up in the German language by the sender of the goods.

§ 13.

The time limit for presenting complaints in cases mentioned, in §12, both for the sender and the declarant, is fixed at two months from the date when the decision of the custom house is made known to the declarant.

As regards the tariff classification of goods, the sender has the right to lodge complaint during the above-mentioned term only if the goods in question are still in the customs warehouses.

§ 14.

German consuls in Russia and Russian consuls in Germany shall have the right to communicate directly, the former with the Russian customs department and the latter with the representatives of German custom house authorities (and provincial customs director, etc.), in regard to customs complaints pending before such authorities.

§ 15.

Conductors, engine drivers, and other railway employees of either of the two contracting parties, who are detected conveying contraband goods on trains going into the territory of the other party, shall, on application of the competent custom house authorities, lose the right to accompany trains to the frontier.

§ 16.

All quarantine and veterinary police measures, to wit: orders to close or open the frontiers for any kind of merchandise, or alterations in the respective local regulations and so forth, shall immediately, on publication, be communicated to each other by the two contracting parties.

All local measures undertaken at the initiative of the circuit representative (Landrat in Germany, Nachalnic Ujesda, Ispravnik in Russia) shall be directly communicated to the respective heads of the districts of the other country. Such communication must contain the motives of the measures unless these are self evident.

Measures taken in Germany by the administrative head of a province (Oberpräsident), or by the president of a government board, and those taken in Russia by the Governor General or Governor, shall mutually be communicated to officials of corrosponding rank. Communications giving the reasons for such measures shall be conveyed through diplomatic channels.

Measures adopted by the central authoritios of the two countries shall, together with the reasons for same, be communicated to each othor through diplomatic channels.

Both parties agree that information regarding veterinaray measures shall be mutually communicated if possible before they are made public and, in any case not later than simultaneously with their publication.

Both Governments will exchange lists indicating the authorities on both sides who are to exchange communications according to tho above described procedure.

§ 17.

Quarantine regulations against epidemic diseases shall be applied by both parties to all travelers crossing the frontier, regardless of their nationality, in accordane with the danger of infection.

§ 18.

Neither party will hinder the return of travelers sent back for lack of a passport or for non payment of customs duties; in circumstances mentioned nbove both parties shall readmit even foreign subjects, especially if the latter have not yet reached the interior. The respective authorities on both sides shall agree as to the necessary measures.

Jewish emigrants of Russian origin bearing Russian emigration certificates and other parties sent back to Russia by German authorities must be readmitted by the Russian frontier authorities, provided these persons have not stayed in Germany more than one month, counting from the day when they crossed the Russo-German frontier.

§ 19.

The frontier authorities of both contracting parties shall be instructed to have all vagabonds and other such persons possessing no passport, who are to be readmitted to the territory of the other party, whose subjects they are, conveyed exclusively to such points on the frontier as have facilities for sending off travelers.

—————————————————–
Including Appendices: The Russian Fleet
From World War I Document Archive
Jump to: navigation, search
Proceedings of the Brest-Litovsk Peace Conference
The Peace Negotiations Between Russia and the Central Powers, 21 November, 1917-3 March, 1918
Appendices: 25. Memorandum
(Washington, Government Printing Office, 1918)

——————————————————————————–

STATUS OF THE RUSSIAN FLEET, 14 SEPTEMBER, 1918.

The following information as to the present status of the former Russian Navy has been derived from all available sources. The reports on this subject have been many, and often conflicting, and of doubtful authenticity; all such reports have been carefully collated, and reliance has been placed only upon those which seemed worthy of credence. It is believedl that the conclusions thus formed are in general correct, but it is impossible to guarantee the accuracy of each detail of information herein set forth.

At the time of the October Revolution, 1917, the Russian Navy was divided into four main forces, namely:

1. The Baltic Fleet.

2. The Black Sea Fleet.

3. The Arctic and White Sea Squadron.

4. The Pacific Squadron.

In addition to these principal forces, a flotilla of gunboats and special service vessels were operating independently (1) in the Danube River and (2) in the Caspian Sea. The present status and disposition of these several forces will now be considered separately:

1. BALTIC FLEET.

DREADNAUGHTS.

Gangut

Poltava

Petro Pavlosk

Sevastopol

New dreadnaughts, all at Cronstadt, in the hands of the Soviet Government

BATTLESHIPS.

Respublika

Andrei Pervozvanni.

Older battleships. Reported to be at Cronstadt, all in the hands of the Soviet Government.

Grazhdanin

At Petrograd.

BATTLE CRUISERS.

Izmail

Kinburn

Borodino

Navarin

These four battle cruisers were building at Petrograd; at least two were nearing completion in January, 1918. They are all in the hands of the Soviet Government.

ARMORED CRUISERS.

Gromoboi

Bayan

Admiral Makharoff

Rurik

These cruisers have been reported at Cronstadt or Petrograd, in the hands of the Soviet Government. However, there is a well-founded report that the Admiral Makharoff struck a mine and sunk off Revel, 9 April, 1918, but this is is unconfirmed. There is also an unconfirmed report that the Rurik was caught in the ice near Revel and fell into the hands of the Germans in March, 1918.

Varyag
Dismantled at Liverpool, June, 1917.

LIGHT CRUISERS.

Aurora

Bogatir

Oleg

Rossiya

Diana (mine layer)

All these cruisers are reported to be at Cronstadt or Petrograd, in the hands of the Soviet Government.

LIGHT CRUISERS BUILDING.

Admiral Butakov .

Admiral Spiridov

These were building at Petrograd and nearly completed in January, 1918. They are doubtless in the hands of the Soviet Government.

Admiral Creig

Admiral Svietlana

Of the same class, were building and nearly completed at Revel. These doubtless fell into the hands of the Germans when they occupied that port early in 1918.

TORPEDO CRAFT.
In January, 1918, the Baltic Fleet included about 86 destroyers, of which 14 were large new vessels ranging from 1,200 to 1,600 tons. There were also a number of small torpedo boats. A large number of the destroyers, perhaps 30, were unable, on account of the ice, to leave Helsingfors when the Germans occupied that port in April, 1918; they have since been disarmed and probably stripped. They are under control of the German-Finnish Government. The remainder of the destroyers and torpedo boats are reported at Cronstadt or Petrograd, while some are said to have taken refuge in Lake Ladoga. All of those are, of course, under control, such as it is, of the Soviet Government. Sixteen destroyers under construction at Revel are doubtless in the hands of the Germans; 10 are under construction at Petrograd.

SUBMARINES .

In January, 1918, the Baltic Fleet included probably 32 submarines. Six or eight of these fell into the hands of the Germans at Revel, and about 15 at Helsingfors. The remainder are reported at Petrograd or Cronstadt under control of the Soviet Government. It is possible that several were blown up by their own crews at Hango just before the German occupation of that port. Seven British submarines that had been operating with the Russian Fleet in the Baltic were thus destroyed outside of Helsingfors by order of the Admiralty between 3 and 8 April, 1918. A number of unfinished submarines may have fallen into the hands of the Germans at Revel. There are also a few unfinished in Petrograd.

AUXILIARIES.
An immense train of auxiliaries is thought to be for the most part in Cronstadt and Petrograd under the control of the Soviet Government, but a few fell into the hands of the Germans at Revel and Abo, and a considerable number remained at Helsingfors until after the German occupation. The latter have been seized by the Finnish Government.

SUMMARY.
All dreadnaughts, battleships, unfinished battle cruisers, and cruisers are in the hands of the Soviet Government with the possible exception of the cruiser Admiral Makharoff, which may have been sunk by a mine, and of the cruiser Rurik, which may have remained in Revel and fallen into the hands of the Germans. The cruisers Admiral Greig and Svietlana, building at Revel, are in the hands of the Germans. Torpedo craft, submarines, and auxiliaries are partly in Soviet hands, partly in German or Finnish hands, and partly destroyed as above set forth.

The fleet in the hands of the Soviet Government is completely demoralized; many of the ships have been stripped by their crews; discipline is practically nonexistent, and in all cases the crews have been much depleted.

The Baltic Fleet can not be considered as a fighting force; it is practically at the mercy of any enemy force that may occupy Cronstadt or Petrograd.

2. BLACK SEA FLEET.
DREADNAUGHTS.

Volya (formerly Imperator Alexander III): Before the occupation of Sevastopol by the Germans, 4 May, 1918 this ship, a new dreadnaught, escaped from Sevastopol to Novorossisk, but upon the demand of the Germans she was returned to Sevastopol early in June, 1918, and is now in their hands.

Swobodnaya Rossiva: (formerly Imperatriza Ekaterina II): This ship likewise escaped to Novorossisk in May, 1918, but when the Germans ordered her to be delivered to them in Sevastopol in June, 1918, she was blown up by her crew and sunk.

Imperatriza Maria:
Blown up and sunk; through an internal explosion at Sevastopol 19 October, 1916, but salvage operations begun by the Russians and continued by the Germans resulted in suceessfully raising her in July, 1918. She is now in the hands of the Germans in Sevastopol and thought to be undergoing repair.

Demokratiya (formerly Imperator Nicolai I): This ship, the last of her class, was laid down at Nicolaieff in 1914 and launched October, 1916. She must have been nearly completed when she fell into the hands of the Germans upon their occupation of Nicolaieff in March, 1918.

PRE-DREADNAUGHT BATTLESHIPS.

Rostislav

Sinop

Georgi Pobodonosetz

Tri Sviatitelya

Boretz Za Svobodo

Ioann Zlatoust
Evstafi

All these older battleships fell into the hands of the Germans when they occupied Sevastopol, 4 May, 1918. They were said to be flying the Ukrainian flag at the time. They were immediatelly unmanned, and remain at Sevastopol in the hands of the Germans.

CRUISERS, LIGHT.

Pamyat Merkuriya

Ochakov

Almaz (yacht)
In the hands of the Germans at Sevastopol.

Prut (ex Turkish Medjidieh)
This ship, formerly the Turkish cruiser “Medjidieh” was sunk by a mine in the Baltic Sea, 3 April. 1915; she was salvaged by the Russians and renamed “Prut;” she fell into the hands of the Germans in Sevastopol May, 1918, and has since been turned over to Turkey, and has arrived at Constantinople.

Four large auxiliary cruisers. Also probably fell into the hands of the Germans in May, 1918

LIGHT CRUISERS, BUILDING.

Admiral Lazareff

Admiral Makhimoff

Admiral Kornilov

Admiral Istonin
These four scout cruisers were buildinst at Nicolaieff, and fell into the hands of the Germans when they occupied that port, 15 March, 1918.

TORPEDO CRAFT.

At the time of the negotiation of the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk, the Black Sea Fleet included 27 destroyers, 17 of which were of large modern type, the remainder being small second-class boats with maximum speed of 14 knots. Some of these destroyers fell into the hands of the Germans upon the occupation of Sevastopol 4 May, 1918, while the remainder fled to Novorossisk. When in June thc Germans demanded the return of the latter to Sevastopol, in accordance with the terms of the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk nine or ten were blown up by their own crews, while the remainder returned to Sevastopol in accordance with the German demands. Therefore, at least, 17 or 18 of these boats are now in thc hands of the Germans, but no information is available to identify them.

In March, 1918, four large modern destroyers building at Nicolaieff, and almost completed, also fell into the hands of the Germans upon their occupation of that port.

SUBMARINES.

At least 14, and possibly 16, submarines comprising the whole Black Sea Flotilla, fell into the hands of the Germans at Sevastopol, 4 May, 1918. There also fell into their hands at Nicolaieff, in March, l918, two other nearly completed submarines, as well as the parts for six more, in packing cases.

GUNBOATS.

Donetz

Teretz

Mubanstz

All in the hands of the Germans at Sevastopol.

MISCELLANEOUS.

A large number of miscellaneous auxiliaries fell into the hands of the Germans at Sevastopol, but the available information is not sufficient to give an accurate list of these.

SUMMARY.
In German hands:

Built:
2 dreadnaughts.
7 battleships.
4 light cruisers.
4 auxiliary cruisers.
17-18 destroyers.
14-16 submarines.
3 gunboats.
Miscellaneous auxiliaries.

Building:
1 dreadnaught.
14 scout cruisers.
4 destroyers.
8 submarines.
It is reported that the Germans have demobilized the Russian, crews of aU the shiPs in their control, and are refitting the entire Black Sea Fleet ana manning aU the ships with full complements. drawn from the German Navy.

(3) ARCTIC AND WHITE SEA SQUADRON

BATTLESHIP.

Chesma: Guardship, Kola Inlet; demobilized; care and maintenance party left.

CRUISER.
Askold: At Murmansk; shortly to be commissioned with British personnel.

DESTROYERS.
Two of the White Sea destroyers are repairing at Liverpool; the remaining four are at Murmansk, each boat with a crew of six men All four boats are in charge of one officer.

SUBMARINES.
One at Archangel and one at Alexandrovsk.

AUXILIARIES.
A very considerable train of merchant cruisers, transports, and fleet auxiliaries are in the warious White Sea and Murman ports.

SUMMARY.

All the White Sea and Arctic forces, although largely demobilized, are under allied and American control.

(4). PACIFIC SQUADRON.

DESTROYER FLOTILLA.

Twelve destroyers at Vladivostok were ordered demobilized by the Soviet Government, 22 February, 1918, and in July, 1918, these boats were disarmed. Two destroyers of this flotilla are at Hong-kong, as is the auxiliary cruiser Orel.

AUXILIARIES.
A number of mine layers and other auxiliaries form part of this force, but no satisfactory information is now available concerning them.

RIVER GUNBOATS.

A flotilla of 28 gunboats was formerly maintained on the Amur River. It is known that most of these have had their engines and guns removed by the Bolsheviki; but no further reliable intormation is available.

SUMMARY.

From the foregoing it would appear that the Pacific Squadron can no longer be considered as a fighting force.

DANUBE RIVER FORCES.

A number of barges, river gunboats, and auxiliaries were formerly detailed for duty on the Danube River in connection with two naval brigades. All the vessels of this force are probably in the hands of the Germans.

CASPIAN SEA FORCE.
Two gunboats and four auxiliaries were formerly maintained on the Caspian Sea. No information is available as to the fate of these vessels

The first two pages of the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk, in (left to right) German, Hungarian, Bulgarian, Ottoman Turkish and Russian

Read Full Post »